activities in inclusive education

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Teaching Expertise

• Classroom Ideas
• Teacher’s Life
• Deals & Shopping
• Privacy Policy

29 Inclusion Based Activities For Students

December 1, 2023 //  by  Seda Unlucay

There is no better time than the present to incorporate lessons about inclusion and diversity into your teaching! Your students will benefit from an appreciation of diverse cultural and social groups that will prepare them for becoming better citizens.

Activities include icebreaker lessons, tactile games, engaging texts, and more! These are guaranteed to build a classroom community of kindness by having your kids practice empathy, tolerance, and acceptance. So get ready to open your students’ minds with our list of 29 inclusion-based activities! 

1. Appreciating Diversity

This simple activity focuses on a discussion about what it means to be an “includer”. Open up the floor for your students to reflect on their own experiences about a time when they felt included and then brainstorm ways they can welcome others – both in the classroom and out in the community! 

Learn More: Education

2. Read and Discuss Smoky Night

This story of a Los Angeles riot is the perfect way to introduce a discussion on the power of empathy during difficult times. Your learners will be spellbound by the dramatic chain of events that take place when a group of neighbors navigate the city’s looting in order to support one another. 

Learn More: Education World

3. Embrace Our Differences PowerPoint

A key part of building an inclusive classroom is teaching your kids to be proud of their uniqueness while also respecting the differences of others. This discussion-based activity will celebrate all of their talents and strengths which will go a long way in fostering an atmosphere of kindness in the classroom ! 

Learn More: Twinkl

4. The Invisible Boy Activity Packet

This touching story is about how small acts of kindness have big impacts on creating an inclusive classroom. Your kiddos will be able to relate to the main character’s feelings of loneliness and will be empowered to share their own experiences of feeling invisible! Watch as your class learns the value of recognizing, seeing, and appreciating others! 

Learn More: Teachers Pay Teachers

5. Watch a Kid-Friendly Video About Autism Spectrum Disorder

Building an inclusive classroom starts with understanding who we are! This animated video and accompanying activities are a simple way to teach your students about ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder). Taking the time to understand ASD will help them appreciate the unique perspectives that are sure to make up their classroom and school community!

Learn More: Brain Pop

6. Play Human Bingo

BINGO never gets old and this version is perfect for making classroom connections! You can use a template or have your kids get creative and make their own. This is a fun activity that helps build a strong community by allowing everyone to feel seen and validated. Enjoy!

Learn More: Icebreaker Ideas

7. Understanding Communities and Differences

This hands-on activity is certainly a creative approach to teaching your kiddos about assumptions! They’ll have an eye-opening experience when they connect the unique variations of potatoes to the diversity found in communities. This is perfect for those who might need a hands-on experience to better understand inclusivity! 

8. Become a Bucket Filler

Have You Filled a Bucket Today? is perfect for discussing the impact our actions have on others. This book makes it super easy for your learners to understand how being kind to others “fills buckets” while being mean “empties buckets”. After reading it, you might be surprised at how quickly they will look for ways to fill people up with kindness!

Learn More: Kathy Saldivar’s Teaching Portfolio

9. Celebrate Diversity with Reader’s Theater

This inclusion activity will be a tough act to follow! Your budding actors will love reading and performing these short plays to learn about what diversity means and how they can celebrate it! This is a fun way to give them a chance to shine on stage and provides an opportunity to improve their reading fluency !

Learn More: Teacher Created Materials

10. Play a Game of Scoot

Your active kiddos who need a little movement in their day will love this game! Scoot gets them out of their seats to move around the classroom as they find question cards and record if they think they are examples of someone showing acceptance or not. Get ready to Scoot your way to a strong classroom community with this fun activity!

11. Learning for Justice

Learning for Justice is an incredible website your kids will love. It offers a wide range of instructional resources, informational texts, and activities to help you build your inclusive classrooms. You can pick a pre-made lesson by topic or grade level that will inspire and challenge your students to think deeply about inclusivity!

Learn More: Learning For Justice

12. Building Family and Classroom Connections

This activity is great for a class that has already made some strong connections. Start by reading some different texts about families and then model a family story to help your kids brainstorm a tale of their own to share. By sharing their stories they’ll begin to see commonalities while also appreciating each other’s unique backgrounds! 

Learn More: Morningside Center

13. Culture Web

In this free association activity, your children will consider the term “culture” and identify related words and ideas. This is a great starting point for a follow-up discussion where your students will create a class definition and then think of elements in their class that represent their idea of “culture”.

14. Land Acknowledgment

A land acknowledgment is an excellent way to honor the Indigenous Peoples who were the original stewards of the land where your school resides. After researching and having thoughtful class discussions, your kids will be ready to write and share a formal land acknowledgment during a school assembly, performance, or other important event.

Learn More: National Museum Of The American Indian

15. Write the World

This one is for your ‘glass half-full’ students! Encourage them to respond to Write the World’s Op-Ed Competition to identify a positive change they would like to see in the world. You’ll be amazed at their ideas to make our world a safer, more welcoming place for everyone!

Learn More: Write The World

16. Parable of the Polygons

The Parable of the Polygons is an online game-like activity to help your kids understand how segregation happens over time. This website makes complex topics like implicit bias more accessible for your young students and explores how small but intentional efforts to build inclusive spaces can benefit everyone! 

Learn More: Parable Of The Polygons

17. Go Pangea

This is a modern version of pen pals that connects kids around the world in a safe online forum! Your students will write a response to a thought-provoking question and then read and comment on others’ posts, allowing discussion from a global classroom of students – it’s a small world after all! 

Learn More: Go Pangea

18. 100 People Project

Understanding the sheer magnitude and diversity of Earth’s population can be tough for your students to grasp. This activity takes a “slice” of the world’s population and places it in a mock village so they can more easily comprehend how culture, language, ethnicity, gender, and age are distributed throughout the world.

Learn More: Belouga

19. Diversity and Inclusion in STEM 

Celebrate diversity in the world of STEM! First Book’s calendar marks important dates that celebrate the contributions of scientists, engineers, and other STEM experts who come from diverse backgrounds and abilities. You can use this to help you plan ahead by having your kids research them and give a short presentation about this influential figure on the appointed day!

Learn More: First Book Marketplace

20. My Brother Charlie Novel Study

This book is perfect for teaching your kids about autism. This set of activities accompanies My Brother Charlie, a book about a set of twins, one of whom is autistic. The novel study will help your students develop insight into the lives of people who are differently abled, building empathy and understanding along the way. 

Learn More: Enhance SEL

21. Special Olympics Unified Sports

Put inclusion into action by joining, forming, or simply learning about a Unified Special Olympics team! From basketball to soccer, your students will have a ball choosing their favorite sport while gaining a little perspective from the fierce athletes who compete! 

Learn More: Special Olympics

22. Inclusive Play-Doh Mats

For your littlest learners, these inclusive Play-Doh mats provide an opportunity for every child to see themselves in your classroom materials. Pair this with a book like The Colors of Us or The Skin You Live In to prompt age-appropriate inclusive discussions about the beauty of different skin colors.

Learn More: Nurture Store

23. Identity Silhouettes

This engaging art project is a phenomenal way to celebrate all the things that make them unique. Your artists will trace their silhouettes, and then add collage materials or doodles that speak to their unique identities. Make sure to display these amazing creations so they can share and celebrate who they are with their classmates!

Learn More: Eller’s Artists

24. Classroom Family Tree

Inclusivity doesn’t just have to be confined to the walls of your classroom! Your students will love showing their classmates their background in this activity where they can bring in photos of their families to add to a class family tree! What a super way to build an understanding of what makes a family!

Learn More: Pinterest

25. Diversity Discussion Cards

Spark deep classroom discussions with these cards that are excellent for your younger students. Using the situations and question prompts is a simple way to guide them as they begin exploring the tricky topics of diversity and inclusion! 

Learn More: Lakeshore

26. Our Favorite Day of the Year

If your class loves story time, then this is the perfect inclusion-based activity for them! Our Favorite Day of the Year is a thoughtful story about a class of students who all have different family traditions and ways of celebrating. Scholastic has an excellent connected lesson plan where your kids will create a class book to share about their unique and special celebrations.

Learn More: Scholastic

27. Share Your Story

Another poignant story to model inclusivity to your kiddies is this book about several children who feel nervous about fitting in on their first days of school. Your learners are sure to find a connection with this group of characters who find out that it is their differences that make them, them ! 

Learn More: The Curriculum Corner

28. Culture Fair

One way to involve the whole school in inclusive practices is by holding a culture fair! Invite your students’ families to share unique foods, traditional dress, and other items that showcase their culture and unique background. The whole school will enjoy learning about the diversity of their community! 

Learn More: Guilderland School District

29. Bread Tasting

Breaking bread together is a great community-building tradition! Take this a step further by holding a bread-tasting party to demonstrate similarities and differences in cultures across the world! Your kiddos can sample baguettes, challah, tortillas, pão de queijo, naan, and more as they learn about their countries of origin. Who knew bread could be so diverse!?

Learn More: Carrots Are Orange

Activities for Equitable Classrooms

Activities overview.

This section catalogues resources that are appropriate for a variety of classroom settings. Each activity includes the overview, goals, and instructions for implementing the activity successfully and includes advice on how to best utilize it. Several resources fit into more than one category, so you may find them under multiple tabs. If you have any feedback about these resources or would like to have an additional activity included, please use our  contact form  to reach us

How to use these Resources

Many of these exercises are simple to carry out but can have a powerful impact on the classroom experience. As such, instructors should employ these activities with attention to core learning objectives and care to ensure the ethical use of student experiences. Given that students come from various backgrounds and experiences, instructors should examine their own assumptions in advance, give students a lot of choice about what they may write and share with others in the class, and be highly transparent about how student responses will be used.

These activities represent the entire catalogue of activity guides found on our website and it is recommended that you use the different categories under the Activities Menu to find resources relating to a specific component of your classroom. Under the Activities Menu, found at the top of the page, you can find the following categories:

• Quick-Prep Activities – These activities may be incorporated into existing courses or lessons with relatively little preparation.
• Icebreakers – These icebreaker activities are inclusive in that they allow students to bring themselves and their identities into the classroom, setting the tone for mutual learning, connection, and respect
• Group Development – These activities help students to examine group relationships and learn about each other beyond appearances on their own terms.
• Self-Reflection – These activities prompt students to consider their relationships to social identity, structural oppression, and intergroup dialogue.

We are grateful to our colleagues in the  Center for Research on Learning and Teaching , the  Program on Intergroup Relations , the  Comprehensive Studies Program , and many others for generously sharing inclusive teaching materials they have developed over years of practice for use on this website.

Reuse Permissions

We appreciate your interest in our site. Generally, we are very happy to have our resources widely used in educational settings of all kinds. Reuse in a classroom, webinar/ professional development, or for individual reflection are all appropriate, so long as it is not for commercial purposes. If you share our resources, we ask that you please include an acknowledgement of our website or specific page reference, as suggested in our Reuse Permissions Guide in APA or MLA format, in addition to any acknowledgement of the original authors. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us via the Contact Form .

ChatGPT for Teachers

Trauma-informed practices in schools, teacher well-being, cultivating diversity, equity, & inclusion, integrating technology in the classroom, social-emotional development, covid-19 resources, invest in resilience: summer toolkit, civics & resilience, all toolkits, degree programs, trauma-informed professional development, teacher licensure & certification, how to become - career information, classroom management, instructional design, lifestyle & self-care, online higher ed teaching, current events, inclusive education: what it means, proven strategies, and a case study.

Considering the potential of inclusive education at your school? Perhaps you are currently working in an inclusive classroom and looking for effective strategies. Lean into this deep-dive article on inclusive education to gather a solid understanding of what it means, what the research shows, and proven strategies that bring out the benefits for everyone.

What is inclusive education? What does it mean?

Inclusive education is when all students, regardless of any challenges they may have, are placed in age-appropriate general education classes that are in their own neighborhood schools to receive high-quality instruction, interventions, and supports that enable them to meet success in the core curriculum (Bui, Quirk, Almazan, & Valenti, 2010; Alquraini & Gut, 2012).

The school and classroom operate on the premise that students with disabilities are as fundamentally competent as students without disabilities. Therefore, all students can be full participants in their classrooms and in the local school community. Much of the movement is related to legislation that students receive their education in the least restrictive environment (LRE). This means they are with their peers without disabilities to the maximum degree possible, with general education the placement of first choice for all students (Alquraini & Gut, 2012).

Successful inclusive education happens primarily through accepting, understanding, and attending to student differences and diversity, which can include physical, cognitive, academic, social, and emotional. This is not to say that students never need to spend time out of regular education classes, because sometimes they do for a very particular purpose — for instance, for speech or occupational therapy. But the goal is this should be the exception.

The driving principle is to make all students feel welcomed, appropriately challenged, and supported in their efforts. It’s also critically important that the adults are supported, too. This includes the regular education teacher and the special education teacher , as well as all other staff and faculty who are key stakeholders — and that also includes parents.

The research basis for inclusive education

Inclusive education and inclusive classrooms are gaining steam because there is so much research-based evidence around the benefits. Take a look.

Benefits for students

Simply put, both students with and without disabilities learn more . Many studies over the past three decades have found that students with disabilities have higher achievement and improved skills through inclusive education, and their peers without challenges benefit, too (Bui, et al., 2010; Dupuis, Barclay, Holms, Platt, Shaha, & Lewis, 2006; Newman, 2006; Alquraini & Gut, 2012).

For students with disabilities ( SWD ), this includes academic gains in literacy (reading and writing), math, and social studies — both in grades and on standardized tests — better communication skills, and improved social skills and more friendships. More time in the general classroom for SWD is also associated with fewer absences and referrals for disruptive behavior. This could be related to findings about attitude — they have a higher self-concept, they like school and their teachers more, and are more motivated around working and learning.

Their peers without disabilities also show more positive attitudes in these same areas when in inclusive classrooms. They make greater academic gains in reading and math. Research shows the presence of SWD gives non-SWD new kinds of learning opportunities. One of these is when they serve as peer-coaches. By learning how to help another student, their own performance improves. Another is that as teachers take into greater consideration their diverse SWD learners, they provide instruction in a wider range of learning modalities (visual, auditory, and kinesthetic), which benefits their regular ed students as well.

Researchers often explore concerns and potential pitfalls that might make instruction less effective in inclusion classrooms (Bui et al., 2010; Dupois et al., 2006). But findings show this is not the case. Neither instructional time nor how much time students are engaged differs between inclusive and non-inclusive classrooms. In fact, in many instances, regular ed students report little to no awareness that there even are students with disabilities in their classes. When they are aware, they demonstrate more acceptance and tolerance for SWD when they all experience an inclusive education together.

Parent’s feelings and attitudes

Parents, of course, have a big part to play. A comprehensive review of the literature (de Boer, Pijl, & Minnaert, 2010) found that on average, parents are somewhat uncertain if inclusion is a good option for their SWD . On the upside, the more experience with inclusive education they had, the more positive parents of SWD were about it. Additionally, parents of regular ed students held a decidedly positive attitude toward inclusive education.

Now that we’ve seen the research highlights on outcomes, let’s take a look at strategies to put inclusive education in practice.

Inclusive classroom strategies

There is a definite need for teachers to be supported in implementing an inclusive classroom. A rigorous literature review of studies found most teachers had either neutral or negative attitudes about inclusive education (de Boer, Pijl, & Minnaert, 2011). It turns out that much of this is because they do not feel they are very knowledgeable, competent, or confident about how to educate SWD .

However, similar to parents, teachers with more experience — and, in the case of teachers, more training with inclusive education — were significantly more positive about it. Evidence supports that to be effective, teachers need an understanding of best practices in teaching and of adapted instruction for SWD ; but positive attitudes toward inclusion are also among the most important for creating an inclusive classroom that works (Savage & Erten, 2015).

Of course, a modest blog article like this is only going to give the highlights of what have been found to be effective inclusive strategies. For there to be true long-term success necessitates formal training. To give you an idea though, here are strategies recommended by several research studies and applied experience (Morningstar, Shogren, Lee, & Born, 2015; Alquraini, & Gut, 2012).

Use a variety of instructional formats

Start with whole-group instruction and transition to flexible groupings which could be small groups, stations/centers, and paired learning. With regard to the whole group, using technology such as interactive whiteboards is related to high student engagement. Regarding flexible groupings: for younger students, these are often teacher-led but for older students, they can be student-led with teacher monitoring. Peer-supported learning can be very effective and engaging and take the form of pair-work, cooperative grouping, peer tutoring, and student-led demonstrations.

Ensure access to academic curricular content

All students need the opportunity to have learning experiences in line with the same learning goals. This will necessitate thinking about what supports individual SWDs need, but overall strategies are making sure all students hear instructions, that they do indeed start activities, that all students participate in large group instruction, and that students transition in and out of the classroom at the same time. For this latter point, not only will it keep students on track with the lessons, their non-SWD peers do not see them leaving or entering in the middle of lessons, which can really highlight their differences.

Apply universal design for learning

These are methods that are varied and that support many learners’ needs. They include multiple ways of representing content to students and for students to represent learning back, such as modeling, images, objectives and manipulatives, graphic organizers, oral and written responses, and technology. These can also be adapted as modifications for SWDs where they have large print, use headphones, are allowed to have a peer write their dictated response, draw a picture instead, use calculators, or just have extra time. Think too about the power of project-based and inquiry learning where students individually or collectively investigate an experience.

Now let’s put it all together by looking at how a regular education teacher addresses the challenge and succeeds in using inclusive education in her classroom.

A case study of inclusive practices in schools and classes

Mrs. Brown has been teaching for several years now and is both excited and a little nervous about her school’s decision to implement inclusive education. Over the years she has had several special education students in her class but they either got pulled out for time with specialists or just joined for activities like art, music, P.E., lunch, and sometimes for selected academics.

She has always found this method a bit disjointed and has wanted to be much more involved in educating these students and finding ways they can take part more fully in her classroom. She knows she needs guidance in designing and implementing her inclusive classroom, but she’s ready for the challenge and looking forward to seeing the many benefits she’s been reading and hearing about for the children, their families, their peers, herself, and the school as a whole.

During the month before school starts, Mrs. Brown meets with the special education teacher, Mr. Lopez — and other teachers and staff who work with her students — to coordinate the instructional plan that is based on the IEPs (Individual Educational Plan) of the three students with disabilities who will be in her class the upcoming year.

About two weeks before school starts, she invites each of the three children and their families to come into the classroom for individual tours and get-to-know-you sessions with both herself and the special education teacher. She makes sure to provide information about back-to-school night and extends a personal invitation to them to attend so they can meet the other families and children. She feels very good about how this is coming together and how excited and happy the children and their families are feeling. One student really summed it up when he told her, “You and I are going to have a great year!”

The school district and the principal have sent out communications to all the parents about the move to inclusion education at Mrs. Brown’s school. Now she wants to make sure she really communicates effectively with the parents, especially as some of the parents of both SWD and regular ed students have expressed hesitation that having their child in an inclusive classroom would work.

She talks to the administration and other teachers and, with their okay, sends out a joint communication after about two months into the school year with some questions provided by the book Creating Inclusive Classrooms (Salend, 2001 referenced in Salend & Garrick-Duhaney, 2001) such as, “How has being in an inclusion classroom affected your child academically, socially, and behaviorally? Please describe any benefits or negative consequences you have observed in your child. What factors led to these changes?” and “How has your child’s placement in an inclusion classroom affected you? Please describe any benefits or any negative consequences for you.” and “What additional information would you like to have about inclusion and your child’s class?” She plans to look for trends and prepare a communication that she will share with parents. She also plans to send out a questionnaire with different questions every couple of months throughout the school year.

Since she found out about the move to an inclusive education approach at her school, Mrs. Brown has been working closely with the special education teacher, Mr. Lopez, and reading a great deal about the benefits and the challenges. Determined to be successful, she is especially focused on effective inclusive classroom strategies.

Her hard work is paying off. Her mid-year and end-of-year results are very positive. The SWDs are meeting their IEP goals. Her regular ed students are excelling. A spirit of collaboration and positive energy pervades her classroom and she feels this in the whole school as they practice inclusive education. The children are happy and proud of their accomplishments. The principal regularly compliments her. The parents are positive, relaxed, and supportive.

Mrs. Brown knows she has more to learn and do, but her confidence and satisfaction are high. She is especially delighted that she has been selected to be a part of her district’s team to train other regular education teachers about inclusive education and classrooms.

The future is very bright indeed for this approach. The evidence is mounting that inclusive education and classrooms are able to not only meet the requirements of LRE for students with disabilities, but to benefit regular education students as well. We see that with exposure both parents and teachers become more positive. Training and support allow regular education teachers to implement inclusive education with ease and success. All around it’s a win-win!

Lilla Dale McManis, MEd, PhD has a BS in child development, an MEd in special education, and a PhD in educational psychology. She was a K-12 public school special education teacher for many years and has worked at universities, state agencies, and in industry teaching prospective teachers, conducting research and evaluation with at-risk populations, and designing educational technology. Currently, she is President of Parent in the Know where she works with families in need and also does business consulting.

You may also like to read

• Inclusive Education for Special Needs Students
• Teaching Strategies in Early Childhood Education and Pre-K
• Mainstreaming Special Education in the Classroom
• Five Reasons to Study Early Childhood Education
• Effective Teaching Strategies for Special Education
• 6 Strategies for Teaching Special Education Classes

Categorized as: Tips for Teachers and Classroom Resources

Tagged as: Curriculum and Instruction ,  High School (Grades: 9-12) ,  Middle School (Grades: 6-8) ,  Pros and Cons ,  Teacher-Parent Relationships ,  The Inclusive Classroom

• Online Education Specialist Degree for Teache...
• Online Associate's Degree Programs in Educati...
• Master's in Math and Science Education

• High contrast
• Press Centre

Search UNICEF

• Inclusive education

Every child has the right to quality education and learning.

There are an estimated 240 million children with disabilities worldwide. Like all children, children with disabilities have ambitions and dreams for their futures. Like all children, they need quality education to develop their skills and realize their full potential.

Yet, children with disabilities are often overlooked in policymaking, limiting their access to education and their ability to participate in social, economic and political life. Worldwide, these children are among the most likely to be out of school. They face persistent barriers to education stemming from discrimination, stigma and the routine failure of decision makers to incorporate disability in school services.

Disability is one of the most serious barriers to education across the globe.

Robbed of their right to learn, children with disabilities are often denied the chance to take part in their communities, the workforce and the decisions that most affect them.

Getting all children in school and learning

Inclusive education is the most effective way to give all children a fair chance to go to school, learn and develop the skills they need to thrive.

Inclusive education means all children in the same classrooms, in the same schools. It means real learning opportunities for groups who have traditionally been excluded – not only children with disabilities, but speakers of minority languages too.

Inclusive systems value the unique contributions students of all backgrounds bring to the classroom and allow diverse groups to grow side by side, to the benefit of all.

Inclusive education allows students of all backgrounds to learn and grow side by side, to the benefit of all.

But progress comes slowly. Inclusive systems require changes at all levels of society.

At the school level, teachers must be trained, buildings must be refurbished and students must receive accessible learning materials. At the community level, stigma and discrimination must be tackled and individuals need to be educated on the benefit of inclusive education. At the national level, Governments must align laws and policies with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities , and regularly collect and analyse data to ensure children are reached with effective services.

UNICEF’s work to promote inclusive education

To close the education gap for children with disabilities, UNICEF supports government efforts to foster and monitor inclusive education systems. Our work focuses on four key areas:

• Advocacy : UNICEF promotes inclusive education in discussions, high-level events and other forms of outreach geared towards policymakers and the general public.
• Awareness-raising : UNICEF shines a spotlight on the needs of children with disabilities by conducting research and hosting roundtables, workshops and other events for government partners.
• Capacity-building : UNICEF builds the capacity of education systems in partner countries by training teachers, administrators and communities, and providing technical assistance to Governments.
• Implementation support : UNICEF assists with monitoring and evaluation in partner countries to close the implementation gap between policy and practice.

More from UNICEF

The boy who changed his community in Serbia

How one boy overcame stigma and demonstrated the power of inclusive education.

I want to change how society sees people with disabilities

"When I came to school, I was determined to show everybody I could make it."

Climate action for a climate-smart world

UNICEF and partners are monitoring, innovating and collaborating to tackle the climate crisis

Two-thirds of refugee children in Armenia enrolled in school, efforts must now focus on expanding access to education for all children

Fixing the Broken Promise of Education for All

This report draws on national studies to examine why millions of children continue to be denied the fundamental right to primary education.

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities adopts a broad categorization of persons with disabilities and reaffirms that all persons with all types of disabilities must enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Inclusive Education: Including Children with Disabilities in Quality Learning

This document provides guidance on what Governments can do to create inclusive education systems.

Towards Inclusive Education: The Impact of Disability on School Attendance in Developing Countries

Using cross-nationally comparable and nationally representative data from 18 surveys in 15 countries, this paper investigates how disability affects school attendance.

Center for Teaching Innovation

Resource library.

• Future Faculty and Academic Careers

Getting Started with Inclusive Teaching Strategies

• Inclusive Teaching
• Incorporating Diversity
• Universal Design & Technology

Inclusive Teaching Strategies

Inclusive teaching strategies refer to any number of teaching approaches that address the needs of students with a variety of backgrounds, learning modalities, and abilities. These strategies contribute to an overall inclusive learning environment in which all students perceive to be valued and able to succeed. Active learning strategies are useful but may not account for dynamics like unconscious bias or gender role stereotyping in the classroom. Inclusive strategies aim to promote self-reflection and action for change. 

Why Use Inclusive Teaching Strategies?

“Even though some of us might wish to conceptualize our classrooms as culturally neutral or might choose to ignore the cultural dimensions, students cannot check their sociocultural identities at the door, nor can they instantly transcend their current level of development… Therefore, it is important that the pedagogical strategies we employ in the classroom reflect an understanding of social identity development so that we can anticipate the tensions that might occur in the classroom and be proactive about them” ( Ambrose, Bridges, DiPietro & Lovett , 2010, p. 169-170).

The benefits of inclusive teaching include:

• Instructors can connect and engage with a variety of students.
• Instructors are prepared for “hot moments” that may arise when controversial material is discussed.
• Students connect with course materials that are relevant to them.
• Students feel comfortable in the classroom environment to voice their ideas/questions.
• Students are more likely to be successful through activities that support their learning modalities, abilities, and backgrounds.

Considerations for Inclusive Teaching Strategies

Ask yourself the following: 

• How might your own cultural-bound assumptions influence your interactions with students? 
• How might the backgrounds and experiences of your students influence their motivation, engagement, and learning in your classroom?
• How can you modify course materials, activities, assignments, and/or exams to be more accessible to all students in your class?

Contact the Center to arrange for a consultation about inclusive teaching strategies or explore the additional resources on your own. The following resources can also help you get started:

• Attend the Center's Faculty Institute for Diversity .
• Register for the 4-week online course, " Teaching & Learning in the Diverse Classroom " and consider taking it with a friend or in a learning community.

The Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching and Learning has resources on issues of inclusivity in the classroom and a STEM-related inclusive teaching course .

• Cornell’s Office of Academic Diversity Initiatives (OADI) and Cornell’s commitment to diversity provide information on what is going on at Cornell regarding diversity and inclusivity.

References 

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., & Lovett, M.C. (2010).  How learning works :  Seven research-based principles for smart teaching . San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Q&A: How inclusion in education has evolved

What is the Salamanca Statement on Inclusion in Education?

The  Salamanca Statement on Inclusion in Education was adopted at the joint UNESCO and Ministry of Education of Spain World Conference on Special Needs Education held in Salamanca, Spain, in 1994. The Statement and its accompanying framework for action represent a worldwide consensus on future directions for the education of children with special needs. It is considered as having provided the impetus for inclusive education worldwide. 

The Salamanca Statement emphasized the principle of inclusive education, which advocates for the education of all children, regardless of their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic, or other conditions, in schools. It called on governments to adopt inclusive policies and stressed the importance of adapting teaching methods, curricula and environments to accommodate the needs of all students. It highlighted the need for adequate training and support for teachers to enable them to address the diverse needs of students effectively and emphasized the importance of collaboration among governments, non-governmental organizations, communities and families to promote inclusive education.

What has happened since the adoption of this Statement?

Since the Salamanca Statement, efforts for inclusive education have continued. The Sustainable Development Goals adopted in 2015 and specifically Goal 4 recognizes the urgent need to provide equitable and inclusive quality education for all learners from the early years through compulsory schooling, technical and vocational education and training, higher education and lifelong learning. It calls on governments to step up efforts to achieve inclusion in education with special emphasis on the role of civil society and the involvement of marginalized groups. It was further highlighted at the United Nations  Transforming Education Summit (TES) in 2022, which recalled the baseline of the Sustainable Development Goal – leave no one behind.

Many countries have enacted laws and policies to promote inclusive education. Of the 133 national commitments to transform education made by countries at the TES, 87% recognized the importance of ensuring more inclusive education systems that cater for the needs of the most vulnerable learners and communities. 

Despite progress since the Salamanca Statement, deep disparities remain. Millions of children and youth are still denied their right to education . Over 7 million refugee children are not enrolled in school. Poverty, geographical location, gender, language, disability, ethnicity, migration or displacement status continue to dictate and limit education opportunities. 

There has been a gradual shift in attitudes towards inclusion in education. More stakeholders, including educators, policymakers, parents and communities are recognizing the value of inclusive education in promoting diversity, equity and social cohesion.  Data shows that when children have at least one sensory difficulty, they are less likely to complete primary school than children who have no sensory difficulties. 

What are the positive trends to ensure inclusion in education?

There is growing emphasis on providing teachers with training and professional development opportunities to effectively support inclusive practices in the classroom. Educators are learning strategies for differentiating instruction, fostering inclusive classroom environments and collaborating with special education professionals and support staff. However, around 40% of countries still do not provide teacher training on inclusion . 

The development and integration of assistive technologies have expanded opportunities for students with disabilities to access educational materials and participate in learning activities alongside their peers. Yet,  laws in 25% of countries make provisions for educating children with disabilities in separate settings, rising to over 40% in Asia and in Latin America and the Caribbean .

There is increasing recognition of the intersectionality of identities and experiences among students. Inclusive education efforts are evolving to address the unique needs and challenges faced by students who belong to multiple marginalized groups, such as students with disabilities who are also from minority ethnic or linguistic backgrounds.  In at least 20 countries, hardly any poor, rural young woman complete upper secondary school.

Overall, the evolution of inclusion in education since the Salamanca Statement and the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015 reflect a growing commitment to creating equitable, diverse and inclusive learning environments where every learner matters, and matters equally. Barriers to inclusion include poor attitudes, inaccessible and unsafe learning environments, rigid curriculum, ineffective teacher training, lack of knowledge of the language of instruction, socio-economic barriers to education, and lack of political will and funding. 

How is UNESCO supporting inclusion in education?

UNESCO plays a significant role in promoting inclusive education around the world through various initiatives, programmes and advocacy efforts. UNESCO supports governments to adopt inclusive education frameworks, provides technical assistance and builds capacity among governments, education stakeholders and institutions to develop inclusive education systems. The Global Education Monitoring Report’s  SCOPE and VIEW databases track indicators related to access, participation, quality and equity in education, including the inclusion of marginalized and vulnerable populations.  

More work remains to be done. UNESCO calls on governments and partners to support inclusive education by:

• Targeting financial support to disadvantaged groups and eliminate direct and indirect schools fees in basic education; 
• providing programmes and avenues for re-entry into the education system, equivalency programmes, programmes for continuous learning and lifelong learning, both in formal and non-formal education systems; 
• forging a holistic approach to education from early childhood onwards to incorporate the concerns of marginalized and excluded groups in all levels of education and in all areas of education;
• developing capacities for policy-making and system management to support strategies towards inclusive quality education; and 
• undertaking research on inclusive policies and quality learning enhancement to build good practice based on the evidence of what works.

More information

• UNESCO inclusion in education  
• Celebrating inclusion in education: 30th Anniversary of Salamanca Statement
• Celebrating inclusion in education: Global Inclusive Schools' Forum  
• SDG4 mid-term progress review: progress since 2015 has been far too slow  
• 2020 GEM Report on inclusion in education : All means All
• Regional Report on inclusion in education: 2020 Latin America and the Caribbean report
• Regional Report on inclusion in education: 2021 Central and Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia
• PEER country profiles on inclusion in education
• Right from the start: build inclusive societies through inclusive early childhood education
• How committed? Unlocking financing for equity in education
• Inclusive teaching: preparing all teachers to teach all students
• Access the  SCOPE website  
• Explore the  VIEW website  

Related items

• Inclusive education
• Topics: Display

More on this subject

Other recent news

• Our Mission

5 Tips for Ensuring That Your Elementary Classroom Is Inclusive

Teachers can design a learning environment that helps their students know they belong and can access multiple avenues to success.

If you’re looking for ways to build an inclusive community in an elementary classroom setting, you can consider the following five strategies to ensure that students feel valued and their academic and social and emotional needs are met.

1. Provide different tools So All Students Can succeed

This idea applies to both students and teachers. Teachers can reinforce the idea that each student requires different tools to be successful in school. This can be modeled through teacher actions. For example, after dealing with a challenge that resulted in frustration, a teacher can model a constructive way to calm down by  taking 10 deep breaths in order to return to work in a calm and focused manner. First, the teacher can think aloud, “That was a frustrating moment. How can I support myself? I know! I can take 10 deep breaths.”

In terms of accessible student learning tools, teachers can introduce a variety of options, and through trial and error they can find an appropriate approach that best meets student needs. Teachers can model each tool as they introduce it. 

Here are some examples of tools: 

• Number lines to support adding and subtracting.
• Fidgets to help students regulate emotions or focus attention on the task at hand.
• Math manipulatives such as counters, cubes, or coins to support math problem-solving. 
• Checklists to support students in completing assignments. Sentence starters or stems. Teachers can provide the beginning of a sentence to answer an open-ended question. For example, when answering the question “How does the character in the story feel?” a stem would be, “The character in the story feels _____.” 

While the above examples are all distinct, they each provide an opportunity for the student to thrive in the classroom setting. Be creative when coming up with these types of tools. 

2. Focus on individualized learning

In an inclusive classroom setting, it’s important for teachers to work with all students individually or in a small group on a frequent basis. This instruction can be for intervention, for extension, or on level learning. When all students have the opportunity for more individualized instruction, it reinforces the idea that all learners are deserving of support and recognition from their teacher. 

Some examples of individualized instruction include the following: 

• Guided reading instruction in small groups or one-on-one to support reading comprehension by teaching a targeted reading skill 
• Writing conferences to provide feedback on student writing and discuss strategies and next steps 
• Intervention opportunities to support learning across all subject areas
• Preteaching concepts such as vocabulary or math strategies
• Extension opportunities that encourage students to think critically 

3. Celebrate successes in the classroom

Teachers should celebrate student successes, no matter how big or small. Learning is something that should be consistently recognized in the classroom, as teachers have the ongoing opportunity to validate students for their progression. Take the initiative to celebrate even the smallest of wins to demonstrate to students that their efforts are seen and important. Some ways to celebrate student success can include providing notes home to share a job well done or coordinating an author’s chair celebration for students to share their work with their peers and/or families. 

4. Emotionally co-regulate

Support students’ emotional needs through co-regulation. Emotional co-regulation is the modeling of how to manage strong emotions. Co-regulation can be supported in the classroom by designing a calm-down center in the classroom for students to access in times of need . This center can include stress balls, fidgets, or yoga and breathing cue cards. As previously stated, it’s important and helpful for teachers to model how to access these tools. 

To support the growth of skills in co-regulation, establishing strong and positive relationships with each student is necessary in order to best provide effective guidance. This can be reinforced during individualized learning, discussed in the second point. In addition to this, teachers can support students in developing stronger relationships with their peers. Social skill development is important because it teaches students how to communicate and work alongside classmates. 

Lastly, teachers can guide students to develop and recognize their sense of self. When children understand their emotions and who they are, they’re better at working and connecting with those around them. One way to do this could be through using a feelings chart that includes feeling and emotion words as well as pictures to match. Teachers can also provide opportunities for students to reflect on how they’re feeling and set personal goals for managing their strong emotions. 

5. Capitalize on student strengths and interests

Providing students with learning opportunities that highlight their strengths builds confidence in the classroom. When students have the chance to showcase their strengths, they’re better connected with the content at hand. If a student is a very talented artist and a developing writer, a teacher can create an assignment where the student is prompted to create a comic strip instead of writing a story. Additionally, when teachers give students feedback, they can take time to recognize their strengths and articulate how their capabilities can support success in other areas. 

Teachers can create learning experiences that highlight student interests—increasing engagement. For example, teachers can develop academic projects centered around student interests. When researching topics for an informational writing project, teachers can prompt students to pick a topic of their interest to better motivate and engage them. 

In math, teachers can develop story problems that involve student names and their passions. For example, in a classroom with Pokémon fans, a teacher could write, “When playing with Pokémon cards, Ameya has three Pikachu cards and one Jigglypuff. How many Pokémon cards does she have altogether?” Lastly, teachers can connect content to careers or real-life experiences that spark student curiosity. For example, if students are interested in engineering, they could design and create a toy while acting as a toy engineer.

Creating an inclusive school environment promotes equity and establishes a safe, welcoming learning community for a diverse group of learners. Teachers can prioritize inclusion in their classrooms so that every student has the opportunity to not only succeed, but thrive.

Inclusive Instruction

Share this page

• Share this page on Facebook.
• Share this page on Twitter.
• Share this page on LinkedIn.
• Share this page via email.
• Print this page.

Educators are tasked with ensuring that students with significant cognitive disabilities have access to and make progress in the general education curriculum. Research shows that these students can acquire knowledge and skills tied to a wide range of grade-level standards and in every content area utilizing a variety of instructional strategies. Inclusive instruction is instruction designed to be accessible to a wide variety of learners. Inclusive instruction ensures that students with significant cognitive disabilities are presented accessible and engaging instructional activities, and are provided the accommodations and modifications to complete learning tasks alongside their peers.

Resources on Inclusive Instruction

This Is Who We Are and What We Do: A Case Study of Two Districts Exemplifying Inclusivity

This study investigated districts that are positive outliers, that is, districts that have implemented inclusive education in a particularly robust and effective way. Two questions guided the research: (1) What are the experiences and viewpoints of district personnel and community members in exemplary districts? (2) How do district personnel and community members in exemplar districts perceive the community’s influence on inclusive education for students with significant cognitive disabilities? Interviews in two exemplar districts revealed that implementing an inclusive model of education for students with significant cognitive disabilities is not only feasible but results in positive outcomes for all students. Further, strong system-level practices and policies made an inclusive approach successful, but the specific policies and practices differed somewhat across districts as these were grounded in the particular district context. The particularity of context points to another key finding: that attentiveness to the community–in particular, enacting an inclusive model with community buy-in–proved essential in each district’s experience.

How Preparation Programs for Moderate-Severe Disabilities in Ohio Incorporate High-Leverage Instructional Practices

This study addresses the incorporation high-leverage practices or HLPs into higher education programs for preservice and practicing teachers who receive preparation in inclusive education at Ohio colleges and universities. Data were collected through four types of research activities: (1) a survey of Ohio faculty members from educator preparation programs, (2) focus-group interviews with Ohio in-service special education teachers, (3) an analysis of syllabi from Ohio educator preparation programs, (4) and focus-group interviews with Ohio parents. Findings suggest, overall, that responding faculty and institutions of higher education are inconsistently teaching HLPs. Those faculty and instructors who incorporated HLPs more consistently tended to include the easier-to-teach HLPs. Because the ability to use HLPs may be an important prerequisite to competence and comfort with inclusion, this inconsistency represents a serious setback for Ohio students with significant cognitive disabilities. Based on the findings, the report makes recommendation for both practice and research.

Inclusive Education Roadmap (IER)

The Inclusive Education Roadmap (IER) is a series of tools, guidance, and processes to be used by state, district, and school teams to build an inclusive system of education. The IER unpacks the complexities of how to create, expand, and sustain inclusive education systems.

TIP #24: Learners with Cerebral/Cortical Visual Impairment (CVI) and Augmentative Alternative Communication (AAC)

Students with Cerebral/Cortical Vision Impairment (CVI) may have difficulty processing the images their eyes see, which can affect many areas of basic visual functions. This TIP focuses on students with CVI and how it relates to learners with significant cognitive disabilities who use Alternative and Augmentative Communication or AAC, with a particular focus on inclusive environments.

TIP #25: Preparing the AAC User for the Next Grade

For students who are non-speaking and communicate using Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC), it is important to support their communication needs during grade level transitions to ensure that the academic, social, and communication gains continue into the next grade. This TIP provides concrete ideas to plan for successful grade level transitions for ACC Users.

Standards-Based Instruction for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities

What are alternate achievement standards and general education academic standards? How do they align and differ? What should instruction look like for students with significant cognitive disabilities? This short video provides key information that clearly illustrates these concepts and their uses in instruction.  

Communication Supports for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities: What Parents Need to Know (TIES Center Brief #9)

This Brief describes how families and other members of Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams can help students get the supports they need to build their communicative competence in inclusive classrooms.

Teacher Preparation for Inclusive Practices: A Resource for Teacher Educators

The purpose of this resource is to support teacher educators as they develop inclusive course content by linking current TIES Center resources to teacher preparation standards across general and special education. Direct links to each resource on the TIES Center website are provided. This resource will be updated on an annual basis each spring.

Preparing School Psychologists to Promote Inclusive Practices for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities

School psychologists are expected to serve school-age children and youth with a wide range of needs. However, their preparation in graduate school tends to focus on supporting students experiencing the learning and behavioral concerns that are most prevalent in schools (e.g., learning disability, attention concerns, behavioral challenges). This report explores how graduate preparation in school psychology can be expanded to better equip school psychologists with the competencies and experiences needed to be strong advocates for the quality inclusion of students with significant cognitive disabilities.

PI #4: Providing Specially Designed Instruction with Considerations from Distance Learning

Through distance, hybrid and in-person learning, collaboration has remained a vital part of providing Specially Designed Instruction (SDI). This article provides key strategies for consideration when planning SDI.

TIP #22: Planning for Whole Group Discussions

This TIP will provide an example of how educators can work collaboratively to create more opportunities for all students, including students with significant cognitive disabilities, to actively participate in whole group discussions in an inclusive classroom.

The Power of Peers: Peer Engagement Implementation Guides

We invited leading experts to share their expertise on implementing these nine educational interventions to promote meaningful engagement and relationships among students with and without disabilities. They created short, practical implementation guides based on their extensive experience working with local schools.

Reading Literature Inclusive Lesson Planning (Inclusive Big Ideas)

Plan inclusive reading literature lessons for grades K-8 using grade-level standards.

Design for Each and Every Learner: Universal Design for Learning Modules

Designing inclusive instruction takes intentional planning and collaboration. The goal of these modules is to learn more about Universal Design for Learning (UDL), a framework developed by CAST, and how to support educators to design learning experiences that are inclusive for each and every learner. 

PI #3: A Collaborative Start to Behavioral Supports When Returning to the School Building

Positive and consistent behavioral supports are needed by all students, and for some students, they are absolutely vital for meaningful engagement to be achieved. During distance learning it was important to know what behaviors could be supported through collaborating with families. When returning to school, it remains important to intentionally identify, collaboratively communicate, and consistently follow through on the identified supports for students with significant cognitive disabilities.

Understanding the Role of Paraprofessionals in Your Child’s Education in Inclusive Classrooms (TIES Center Brief #7)

It is important for parents to know what paraprofessionals should be expected to do in inclusive classrooms. Parents should also know what qualities paraprofessionals should have, and what supports and training they need to be successful in their role. The purpose of this Brief is to address these points. It also pro-vides examples of appropriate use of paraprofessionals in inclusive classrooms and some red flags that might indicate a need to adjust paraprofessional support or training.

PI #2: 5 Back to School Positive Behavior Strategies

Now that we are back to school, it is important to remember how to positively support behavior. It is especially important to consider those students who might need more support after being away from the school building last year. 

Creating Communities of Belonging for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities

Everyone wants to be valued and have a sense of belonging in their community.  The need for valued belonging is true for students in a school community as well.  Although belonging is equally important for all students, students with significant cognitive disabilities are less likely to experience a deep sense of belonging.

PI #1: Planning for Students Transitioning Back to School - Three Important Components

As teams manage various scenarios for when and how-to students will return to schools, proactive thinking about what needs to be considered to successfully transition students back to school is of utmost importance. This article will  facilitate this transition for school teams, students, and their families.

Pivot to In-Person Instruction: An Overview Framework

The TIES Distance Learning Series provides multiple strategies for supporting students with significant cognitive disabilities during distance and hybrid learning. The Pivot to In-Person Instruction Series applies the same principles, as most students are returning to in-person instruction. However, we expect that some schools will need to pivot between the various instruction models given the changing nature of the COVID-19 virus.

Comprehensive Inclusive Education: General Education and the Inclusive IEP

This resource is intended to guide IEP teams in a comprehensive inclusive education planning process based on the expectation that each student can actively participate, belong, contribute, and learn in the school and larger community. 

TIP #18: Choosing Accessible Grade-Level Texts for Use in Inclusive Classrooms

This TIP will outline considerations for choosing appropriate accessible grade-level texts for students with significant cognitive disabilities in inclusive classrooms.

TIP #19: Creating Accessible Grade-level Texts for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms

This TIP explains ways teachers can adapt text and provide scaffolding to ensure each and every student is provided access and opportunity to meet grade-level learning expectations.

TIES Brief 6: Grading My Child with Significant Cognitive Disabilities in an Inclusive Classroom

Grades are assigned and report cards given in inclusive classrooms. It is important that thought has been given to how work from students with significant cognitive disabilities will be graded and what will be in the report card. The purpose of this parent Brief is to (a) identify the IEP team’s role in grading and report cards, (b) provide ideas for how to talk to teachers about grades and their meaning, and (c) suggest what to do if the school or district has not yet identified grading and report card considerations for students with significant cognitive disabilities in inclusive classrooms.

TIP #14: Academic Standards for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms: Same Content Standards, Alternate Achievement Standards

The purpose of this brief is to clarify what academic content standards and alternate achievement standards are, how they are different, and how they contribute to inclusive education.

TIP #15: Turn and Talk in the Inclusive Classroom

In this TIPS Brief, we show how to remove barriers to allow students with significant cognitive disabilities (SCD) to engage in Turn and Talk activities during instruction in general education classes through the UDL framework and examples from an inclusive classroom.

TIP #16: Making Inferences in the Inclusive Classroom

In this TIPS, we give suggestions for teachers on how to teach inferencing skills to all learners in an inclusive classroom.  The examples presented are reflective of a collaborative process required to plan the use of inferencing strategies in inclusive classrooms through a Universal Design for Learning framework.

DL #23: Pivoting Between Paraprofessional Support in Inclusive Schools and Distance Learning

Paraprofessionals are central to the success of educating students with disabilities in general education contexts, especially students with significant cognitive disabilities. Distance learning is pushing the field to consider how paraprofessionals can fulfill their roles in new and creative ways, particularly with the use of technology. Apply the Learning Components framework to clarify paraprofessional roles and how they can be carried out whether instruction is in-school or during distance learning. 

Lessons for All: The 5-15-45 Tool

This tool will help you go from a borrowed, bought, or mandated lesson to a more inclusive lesson for all.

TIES Brief 5: The General Education Curriculum–Not an Alternate Curriculum!

TIES Brief 4: Providing Meaningful General Education Curriculum Access to Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities

Tip #10: the use of graphic organizers in inclusive classrooms for students with significant cognitive disabilities.

Classroom teachers have used graphic organizers for years to help students gather, sift through, organize, and share information.

TIES Distance Learning #12: Promoting Engagement for Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities on Group Learning Platforms

TIP #8: High Leverage Practices Crosswalk

High Leverage Practices (HLPs) are strategies every teacher should know and use. The purpose of this TIPs sheet is to provide ideas for inclusive general education classroom implementation of HLPs that are common to both general and special education.

TIES Distance Learning #3: Effective Specially Designed Instruction (SDI) Within the Distance Learning Environment: What in the world does that look like?

TIES Distance Learning #1: Morning Meetings

TIP #7: Homework in the Inclusive Classroom

This TIP provides information and recommendations for collaborative educational teams on how to make homework successful for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities in inclusive classrooms. 

Instructional Practices for Students with the Most Significant Disabilities in Inclusive Settings: A Review of the Literature (TIES Center Report #104)

The purpose of this report is to update previous literature reviews on pedagogical practices for students with the most significant disabilities in inclusive settings.

TIP #2: Using Collaborative Teams to Support Students with Significant Communication Needs in Inclusive Classrooms

This TIP outlines how to employ collaborative teams to support students with significant communication needs in inclusive classrooms. Collaborative teams will require additional planning for general and special education teachers as well as related service providers.

Creating Inclusive Schools: What Does the Research Say? | Impact | Winter 2018/19 Volume 31, Number 2

Review of the research on inclusion, presenting the essential practices that create inclusive schools as well the benefits of inclusive education.

TIES 101: Communication Supports in the Inclusive Class

TIES Communication 101 is a new asynchronous professional learning series created with our partners at the University of Kentucky (UKY). It provides evidence-based strategies for supporting AAC users in inclusive classrooms. One hour of ASHA credit is available for Speech-language pathologists at no charge.

Icon(s) used on this page:

User account menu

Request More Info

Fill out the form below and a member of our team will reach out right away!

" * " indicates required fields

4 Proven Inclusive Education Strategies for Educators (Plus 6 Helpful Resources)

What Is Inclusive Education?

Why is inclusive education important, inclusive classroom strategies, inclusive learning resources for teachers, frequently asked questions.

• General education teachers and special education teachers alike are recognizing the benefits of inclusive education . This approach to learning aims to cultivate learning environments that are equitable and nurturing to every student.
• Inclusive Classroom FAQs 

Inclusive learning provides all students with access to flexible learning choices and effective paths for achieving educational goals in spaces where they experience a sense of belonging. In an inclusive education environment, all children, regardless of ability or disability, learn together in the same age-appropriate classroom. It is based on the understanding that all children and families are valued equally and deserve access to the same opportunities.

Inclusive learning goes hand in hand with Universal Design for Learning (UDL) , a set of principles for curriculum development that gives all students an equal opportunity to learn. According to UDL on Campus , a collection of resources developed by CAST : 

“UDL provides a blueprint for creating instructional goals, methods, materials, and assessments that work for everyone — not a single, one-size-fits-all solution but rather flexible approaches that can be customized and adjusted for individual needs.” 

UDL shares many commonalities with the Theory of Multiple Intelligences espoused by Harvard Professor Howard Gardner, whose work documented “the extent to which students possess different kinds of minds and therefore learn, remember, perform and understand in different ways.”

EARN YOUR MASTER’S!   Video Explores ABCs of Online MEd >>

Studies have shown the benefits that inclusive classrooms offer for children with disabilities and their peers. Instead of pulling children out of the classroom to offer them specialized instruction, in an inclusive classroom, special education teachers come into the classroom. This allows for general education teachers and specialists to work together in the same learning environment, benefiting all students, who are offered additional resources and support. 

This support often results in greater academic gains for students with disabilities. According to a 2017 report from the Alana Institute :

“A large body of research indicates that included students develop stronger skills in reading and mathematics, have higher rates of attendance, are less likely to have behavioral problems, and are more likely to complete secondary school than students who have not been included. As adults, students with disabilities who have been included are more likely to be enrolled in postsecondary education, and to be employed or living independently.”

[RELATED] How to Advance Your Career: A Guide for Educators >> 

Students without disabilities can also benefit from inclusive teaching strategies. One research study published by Frontiers in Psychology found that inclusive practices in education help children without disabilities:

• Develop a positive attitude toward diversity
• Learn social skills related to helping others
• Improve academic learning and cognitive development

Are you ready to support inclusion in the classroom ? To do so means challenging the status quo, removing curriculum barriers and presenting educational goals in interesting ways to engage all learners and serve all students equitably. Below are four important strategies to consider when designing an inclusive classroom and curriculum.

• Use universal design principles to create accessible classrooms

UDL is a set of principles that were born from the desire to offer every student an equal opportunity to learn, based on the idea that every person has their own unique and individual learning style. 

According to CAST , there are three primary brain networks that are responsible for how a person learns: the affective network, the recognition network and the strategic network. These networks provide the basis for the three UDL Guidelines :

• Engagement, or the “why” of learning, which corresponds to the affective network
• Representation, or the “what” of learning, which corresponds to the recognition network
• Action and Expression, or the “how” of learning, which correspond to the strategic network

Understanding the foundation of UDL — the brain networks and corresponding guidelines — is imperative for teachers who wish to implement inclusive teaching strategies in the classroom.

The National Center on Universal Design for Learning has a plethora of resources and information for educators interested in universal design. You’ll find videos offering helpful implementation tips and ideas in the “UDL Principles and Practices” section of their YouTube Channel.

Loui Lord Nelson, author of the best-selling UDL primer, Design and Deliver , recommends starting small. In an interview with Brookes Publishing , she said, “Focus on one guideline or checkpoint and use that to make a change to your learning environment that you can sustain. That way, there’s no extreme investment of mental-energy or physical time.”  

• Use a variety of instructional formats

“Provide multiple means of representation” is one of the three UDL guidelines and specifically pertains to the “what” of learning. While some students are visual learners, others may grasp information better when it is presented through text, when it is spoken orally or taught through kinesthetic learning. Some students do best with a combination of the above. While these differentiated teaching methods may support the needs of students with disabilities, they also offer diversity of instruction to the entire classroom, giving each and every student an opportunity to learn in the way they do best. Similarly, using different mediums to present information and engage students is important in inclusive classrooms. “Multiple means of action and expression” is another UDL guideline, meant to represent the “how” of learning. Some students may find that their best outlet and means of expression comes through writing, while others may prefer to give an oral presentation, act out a play or create a piece of art. Each student is different and should be given the opportunity to express their knowledge through the methods that work best for them. Additionally, teachers can use a diversity of materials and mediums to engage students. Examples of mediums could include theater, art, video and computer software in addition to the traditional mediums of lecture and text. Through using varied teaching techniques and mediums, teachers can increase the engagement of their entire class, not just the students who respond to a particular style of learning and expression.

• Know your students’ IEPs/504s 

To create an equitable learning environment for everyone, it is important to familiarize yourself with students’ Individualized Education Program (IEP) or 504 plans . If you have a student with a 504 or IEP plan, you are legally required to make any necessary accommodations as outlined in that plan. You can work with the school counselor or teaching specialists to better understand the student’s specific needs. Much like the concept of inclusive learning, 504s were designed to ensure that students with disabilities are allowed to learn in a regular classroom environment, while still being provided with services, educational aids or accommodations they may require. An IEP is only slightly different than a 504; the difference being that students with an IEP may require additional educational services outside of the regular classroom. These services are typically provided and monitored by additional support staff.

• Develop a behavior management plan

Disruptive classroom behavior can affect not just the teacher, but the other students in the classroom as well. Developing a behavior management plan can help you prepare for the inevitable moment a student or students exhibit disruptive behaviors — with the understanding that some behaviors are of much less consequence than others (talking out of turn vs. being defiant or aggressive). The behavior plan should be shared with parents and students, so that everyone is aware of the expectations and consequences should those expectations not be met. The most effective plans typically involve a great deal of positive reinforcement and a clear understanding of the expectations. 

There are several different types of behavior management plans you can implement depending on the needs of your classroom, including a whole group plan, a small group plan, an individual plan or an individual plan designed for particularly challenging students.

• Inclusive Schools Network (ISN) — ISN is a digital resource for families, schools and communities looking to design and implement effective inclusive schools. They offer a wide variety of resources including assessment tools, collaboration strategies, technology advice and much more.
• National Center for Learning Disability (NCLD) — NCLD advocates for people with disabilities offering programs and resources for parents, young adults, professionals and educators. They also publish reports and studies on a range of topics related to disability and offer scholarship information for students with learning and attention issues.
• Wrightslaw — Wrightslaw is a great resource for those looking to learn more or stay up-to-date on special education law, education law and advocacy for children with disabilities.
• TASH — TASH works to advance inclusive communities through advocacy, research, professional development, policy and information and resources for parents, families and self-advocates. They offer several different publications including a blog, annual reports, a podcast and more.
• The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) — ASCD covers a range of educational topics not limited to inclusive learning. This is a great resource for educators across all disciplines and grade levels, whether they are looking to create an inclusive school or to simply find new strategies to improve their effectiveness in the classroom.

What does “inclusion” mean in education?

Though there is no one universally accepted definition of what “inclusion” means in an educational context, the Inclusive Schools Network states that inclusion generally means “all students are full and accepted members of their school community, in which their educational setting is the same as their non-disabled peers, whenever appropriate.”

Rather than place students with disabilities in separate classrooms or even have them work on separate curriculum, inclusion — and, to that end, inclusive education — places all students, regardless of their abilities, in the same general education classroom so that they have equal access and opportunities. This is the central premise on which all inclusive teaching strategies are based.

What should an inclusive classroom look like?

An inclusive classroom doesn’t look all that different from any other general education classroom. Students of all abilities and from diverse backgrounds learn alongside one another and receive the same level of respect and recognition. What makes the classroom truly inclusive, though, is that:

• The primary focus is on students’ abilities, rather than their disabilities
• General education and special education teachers work together to teach, support and inspire students
• Curriculum is based on Universal Design for Learning principles
• Teachers use a variety of techniques and resources to connect with students’ individual learning styles

At the University of San Diego, we believe in the power of inclusive learning. We also understand the importance of an educated teaching force when it comes to inclusion and special education. That’s why we offer a 100% online Master of Education degree with a specialization in Inclusive Learning, Special Education and Universal Design . To learn more and view the curriculum, visit the USD Master of Education program page .

Be Sure To Share This Article

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

Top 11 Reasons to get Your Master of Education Degree

Free 22-page Book

• Master of Education

Related Posts

Teaching Commons Conference 2024

Join us for the Teaching Commons Conference 2024 –  Cultivating Connection. Friday, May 10.

Inclusive and Equitable Discussions

Main navigation.

Discussions are commonly used in actively engaged learning environments. These strategies can help to improve the quality of discussion in online as well as in-person formats.

Support students when examining potentially upsetting content

For education to be transformative, students must feel comfortable sharing their life experiences, disagreeing, and making mistakes, while also being challenged to reconsider and revise their current attitudes. Consider the acronym JUSTICE when planning a course or lesson to help ensure that students can   learn from upsetting material and assume greater agency in their course experience.

• Justified —Do your course materials best serve your course learning goals?
• Underscored —Are students adequately warned about encountering upsetting material?
• Scaffolded —Are students adequately prepared to engage with upsetting material?
• Transparent —Are students aware of your pedagogical justification for using the material, and your concern for its impact on them?
• Informed —Do students have the motivation, information, and skills to learn from upsetting material?
• Chosen —How much agency do students have in how they engage with upsetting material?
• Evaluated —Do you solicit regular feedback on student learning and well-being, and do you reflect after the course is over on what you can improve for next time?

See  Strive for JUSTICE in Course Learning  for more details.

Use prompts or questions that elicit a variety of perspectives

Prompts that encourage higher-level critical thinking and encourage students to connect to personal experiences or other domains of knowledge can yield deeper discussion.

• Put authors or studies in dialogue with one another, or ask students to craft imaginary dialogues between opposing views.
• Pose problems to be solved. 
• Pose provocative questions.
• Pose questions that evoke personal values.

The Discussion Book (available online through Stanford University Libraries ) offers fifty different ways to structure discussions. Consider question brainstorms, debates, quotation-based discussions, understanding checks, drawing discussions, and many others that can be adapted to the online format.

Ensure equitable participation

Equitable class participation doesn't just happen, it takes deliberate and attentive practices. Oftentimes some individuals might dominate group discussions, while other perspectives remain underrepresented. Consider these strategies for ensuring equitable participation.

Assign roles to students

Assigning roles will help students start the conversation and support equitable participation. Possible roles include:

• The first speaker  initiates a discussion by responding to the prompt first.
• The timekeeper  monitors how much time the group has left.
• A reporter reports to the larger class at the end of a small-group discussion.
• A facilitator  launches and maintains discussion, periodically summarizes, and synthesizes the main ideas at the end.
• A question-asker  raises alternatives to consider.
• An equity monitor  encourages all members to share their ideas.
• A scribe  tracks and records ideas.

Randomly assign or select students with an equitable prompt

Use a variety of prompts when assigning or selecting a person such as whose first name is closest to the end of the alphabet, who is wearing the shortest sleeves, whose birthday is coming up the soonest, or whose hometown is closest to campus. This may have the added benefit of acting as an icebreaker.

Be considerate about putting students on the spot

If you want a student to share a contribution that you overheard in a breakout room or saw in an assignment, contact them in advance, or over private messaging in the Zoom live chat function, to ask if they would feel comfortable sharing their contribution with others when you reconvene as a whole class.

Be flexible about participation

Zoom fatigue or unforeseen circumstances can make online group work very unproductive and even stressful for some students sometimes. Perhaps instruct students to send a private chat message to you if they need accommodation, or allow them to choose whether to participate verbally or in writing.

Evaluate discussions along various dimensions

It can be difficult to monitor and assess learning in discussion groups. Consider seeking out input from the students in determining how successful a discussion activity is.

• Ask students to submit brief reflections on the main takeaways from particular discussions.
• Encourage students to reflect metacognitively on what they did or can do to get the most out of discussion activities.
• Ask students to periodically assess the success of discussions relative to the class norms, through a discussion thread or poll.
• Provide, or have students create, a rubric for assessing their contributions to the discussion.
• 10 Strategies for Engaging Discussions Online , Center for Teaching and Learning (2020).
• Successful breakout rooms in Zoom , Teaching Commons (2020).
• Small group activities for Zoom breakout rooms , Teaching Commons (2020).
• Strive for JUSTICE in Course Learning , Center for Teaching and Learning (2020).

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

How Inclusive Interactive Learning Environments Benefit Students Without Special Needs

Silvia molina roldán.

1 Department of Pedagogy, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain

Jesús Marauri

2 Faculty of Psychology and Education, University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain

Adriana Aubert

3 Department of Sociology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Ramon Flecha

Associated data.

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Growing evidence in recent years has led to an agreement on the importance and benefits that inclusive education has for students with special educational needs (SEN). However, the extension and universalization of an inclusive approach will also be enhanced with more evidence on the benefits that inclusion has for all students, including those without SEN. Based on the existing knowledge that learning interactions among diverse students are a key component of educational inclusion, the aim of this study is to identify the impact on students without SEN of being educated with students with SEN in shared, inclusive, interactive learning environments. Data were collected in three schools using a qualitative approach with a communicative orientation. Semistructured interviews were held with teachers as well as community volunteers participating in the schools. Further, focus groups were conducted with students and teachers. The results show that students without SEN benefit from participating in interactive learning activities with peers with SEN in different ways: (1) they learn to respect others, accept differences, and acknowledge different abilities, thereby creating opportunities for new friendships to develop; (2) they learn about abilities related to helping others participate and learn, to be patient and to gain the satisfaction in helping others learn and behave better; and (3) they benefit from the cognitive effort required to explain themselves and from the contributions of peers with SEN from which they can learn.

Introduction

The extension and universalization of an inclusive approach is a goal and a challenge for educational systems around the globe, as reflected in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Inclusive education means that all children learn together in schools that recognize and respond to the diverse needs of students, ensure quality education for all through appropriate curricula, organization, teaching strategies and resource use ( UNESCO, 1994 ), and overcome the barriers to the presence, participation, and achievement of all students in general education classes ( UNESCO, 2017 ). However, the original idea of inclusive education focuses on the education of a particular group of students—those with special educational needs (SEN)—to overcome practices of special education that have traditionally segregated students based on a medical model of disability ( Kurth et al., 2018 ). In this regard, inclusive education is generally acknowledged as the venue to enhance both the learning and social development of students with disabilities and other SEN, and therefore the way to fulfill their right to shared quality education in mainstream settings ( United Nations, 2007 ). Consequently, discourse, arguments and research about inclusive education have often centered on the collective of students with SEN, and growing evidence has led to an agreement on the benefits that inclusive education has for these students, as found in reviews of recent research. For instance, the meta-analysis conducted by Oh-Young and Filler (2015) compared the outcomes of students with disabilities between placement settings and found that students in more integrated settings outperformed those in more segregated settings, both in the academic and social domains. The recent review of research by Kefallinou et al. (2020) concluded that there is plenty of research that justifies inclusion both from the educational and the social angles, due to the proven positive effects of educational inclusion on the academic outcomes of students with disabilities, and its positive impact on the subsequent social inclusion of people with disabilities in terms of further academic opportunities and qualifications, access to employment and developing personal relationships within the community.

Because inclusive education is about quality education for all, it is important to look at the potential benefits of inclusion for all students. In this regard, the fact that most of the research on inclusive education concerns categories of learners, particularly those with disabilities and other SENs, may cause us to overlook the impacts on other collectives of learners and may not be consistent with a definition of inclusive education geared toward all learners ( Messiou, 2017 ). The objective of extending and universalizing an inclusive approach would benefit from evidence showing that it is positive—or at least not negative—for all students, including those without SEN.

For this reason, some studies have considered the impact of inclusion on students without special needs. Some of these studies have examined the development of students’ attitudes, empathy and understanding of others. For instance, Smith and Williams (2001) showed that children without disabilities can be sensitive to the consequences of different types of impairments and generally have a positive perception of the capabilities of children with different kinds of impairments, which has positive implications for inclusion. Tafa and Manolitsis (2003) found that typically developing children educated in inclusive programs with children with SEN have increased respect, awareness, and acceptance of their peers’ needs, develop less prejudices, and learn to be more helpful and supportive toward people with disabilities, according to parents’ perspectives. This is consistent with other studies that concluded that inclusive education can play a role in challenging disabling attitudes by transforming non-disabled children’s attitudes toward people with disabilities, therefore contributing to building a more inclusive society ( Beckett, 2009 ). Grütter et al. (2017) analyzed the role of friendship between students with and without SEN and found that opportunities to forge close friendships between students with and without SEN enhance the positive attitudes of students without SEN toward students with SEN; this suggests that inclusive education may benefit from educational practices that actively promote friendship among students with and without SEN. Research has also studied the impact of inclusion on the development of cognitive abilities such as theory of mind (ToM), finding that children without SEN educated in inclusive classes with children with SEN develop a better ToM than their peers educated in traditional classes ( Smogorzewska et al., 2020 ). According to Smogorzewska et al. (2020) , a greater understanding of diversity, tolerance, acceptance of others and the use of prosocial behaviors in inclusive classrooms seem to promote ToM development.

Other studies have explored the impact on academic learning. Although some studies find that the presence of SEN students in regular classes is related to slightly lower performance of their peers without SEN (e.g., Hienonen et al., 2018 ), the conclusions of different reviews of research suggest the contrary. Ruijs and Peetsma (2009) revealed that inclusive education has neutral to positive effects for both students with and without SEN compared to non-inclusive education, especially regarding academic achievement. Focusing on the impacts of students without SEN, Kalambouka et al. (2007) showed no evidence of adverse effects of the inclusion of children with SEN, indicating that most findings involved positive or neutral effects on children without SEN. Similarly, Szumski, Smogorzewska and Karwowski’s meta-analysis (2017) underscored a significant and positive—although weak—effect of the presence of students with SEN on the academic achievement of students without SEN. In none of the examined conditions were significant negative impacts found; in contrast, they were at worst neutral and positive in many cases. More recently, Kefallinou et al. (2020) signaled in their review that the inclusion of students with disabilities did not negatively affect the learning outcomes or the social development of their peers without disabilities, and there was a small—but positive—impact on the academic achievement of students without SEN. In addition, the benefits of inclusive education were connected to effective classroom practices characterized by learning interactions, such as cooperative and dialogic learning, peer tutoring, or collaborative problem-solving, which are beneficial for all learners in the classroom ( Kefallinou et al., 2020 ). As argued in these studies, the results support the idea that inclusive education is not against the right of the majority of students to receive quality education, as not only students with SEN, but also those without SEN, may benefit from being educated together.

One of the key characteristics of inclusive educational environments is the opportunity to have rich and diverse learning interactions among heterogeneous students. The role of social interactions in children’s learning and development has long been investigated by psychologists of education since the onset of the sociocultural theory of learning ( Vygotsky, 1978 ; Bruner, 1996 ). Bruner’s concept of communities of mutual learners helps us to understand the benefits of learning interactions between peers in contexts of diversity. According to Bruner (1996) , group work in schools in the form of communities of mutual learners allows for an equilibrium between individuality and group effectiveness, ensuring that everyone progresses according to their ability and giving all children the opportunity “to enter the culture with awareness of what it is about and what one does to cope with it as a participant” (p. 82). Interactive learning spaces, especially when they are mediated by dialogue, permit collective thinking and learning, enhance academic achievement, social skills, and social cohesion, and are especially beneficial for vulnerable groups of students ( Fernández-Villardón et al., 2020 ; García-Carrión et al., 2020 ). Hence, the objectives of inclusive education would be better attained when such interactive and dialogic learning environments are promoted.

Interactive groups (IGs) and dialogic literary gatherings (DLGs) are specific interactive learning environments that take into account the value of diversity, interaction, and dialogue for learning. Both IGs and DLGs have been identified as successful educational actions (SEAs) that foster successful educational outcomes in diverse student populations ( Flecha, 2015 ). In IGs, classrooms are arranged into small groups of heterogeneous students (e.g., 4–5 students each) who work on instrumental learning activities (especially literacy and math) proposed by the teacher using interaction and dialogue to help each other solve the activity, while a volunteer from the community (e.g., a family member, a former student, or a neighbor) supports each group, dynamizing students’ interactions and mutual help. IGs boost students’ academic learning and—due to the solidary bases of the IG, where students are prompted to help each other—improve the school climate; new friendships are also encouraged, as well as multicultural coexistence ( García-Carrión and Díez-Palomar, 2015 ; Valero et al., 2018 ; Zubiri-Esnaola et al., 2020 ).

Dialogic literary gatherings consist of debating books from classical literature that students have previously read. After agreeing to the chapters that will be discussed at the next gathering, students read the text individually or with help from their family members, a teacher, or a peer, and select a piece of text they found relevant to share at the gatherings. There, they discuss and reflect on the text based on the principles of dialogic learning ( Flecha, 2000 ). DLGs contribute not only to a better understanding of the text, but also enhance students’ reading, reasoning, and argumentative abilities, and deepen understanding of others’ perspectives and emotional well-being ( García-Carrión, 2015 ; Garcia et al., 2018 ; Foncillas et al., 2020 ).

Both DLGs and IGs have been implemented with students with SEN included in mainstream classrooms, and shared with students without SEN. The interactive learning environments created through IGs and DLGs improve the learning and relationships of students with SEN; therefore IGs and DLGs encompass inclusive learning environments ( Duque et al., 2020 ). Less is known about the impact of IGs and DLGs on students without SEN when they are shared with students with SEN. The aim of this study is to identify impacts for students without SEN of being educated with students with SEN in shared, inclusive, interactive learning environments such as IGs and DLGs.

Materials and Methods

This research is a qualitative study of schools that implement interactive learning environments—specifically interactive groups (IGs) and dialogic literary gatherings (DLGs)—with students with and without special needs. The study was conducted within the framework of a broader competitive research project titled “Interactive learning environments for the inclusion of students with and without disabilities: Improving learning, development and relationships” (INTER-ACT). More specifically, this study is part of the project’s second objective: “To analyze in depth successful cases of schools implementing IGs and DLGs with students with disabilities to identify the best conditions to increase the impact on the improvement of learning, development, and relationships.”

The specific objectives of this study were: (1) to determine whether participating in IGs and DLGs with students with SEN has an impact in terms of learning and/or development for children without SEN; (2) to identify types of impacts on students without SEN as a result of participating in IGs and DLGs with students with SEN; and (3) to understand how these impacts are related to being educated with students with SEN in shared, inclusive, interactive learning environments such as IGs and DLGs.

Data from the three mainstream educational centers that participated in the second objective of the INTER-ACT project were considered. These centers were one primary school, one primary and secondary school, and one secondary school that educate students with and without special needs in shared learning environments, and which have already implemented interactive learning environments (IGs and DLGs) in the framework of an inclusive project. The schools were selected for their participation in the INTER-ACT project according to the following criteria: (a) schools that had been organizing classrooms in IGs and/or DLGs for at least two academic years; (b) these schools serve a higher percentage of students with disabilities than the average in the region; (c) these schools implement IGs and DLGs inclusively, involving students with SEN with their peers who do not have SEN; and (d) these schools had observed improvements in their students, recorded through quantitative or qualitative evidence, since they have implemented IGs and/or DLGs.

Data Collection

Qualitative data were collected in each school with the aim of understanding, from the participants’ experiences, how the interactive learning environments that were being facilitated with students with and without SEN contributed to students’ cognitive and social development. The data collection techniques used were semistructured interviews with teachers and community volunteers participating in the schools, and focus groups with students and teachers (see Table 1 ). For the purpose of data collection, students with SEN were considered those with an official report that entailed learning difficulties in the school context. Conversely, students without SEN were those without an official report and who did not present particular learning difficulties in the school context. Purposeful sampling was employed to select participants who could be especially knowledgeable about the object of study. In all cases, the participants selection was agreed with the school principals to select those participants that could be more representative. All data collection techniques were carried out on the school premises for the participant convenience. Interviews with teachers lasted between 60 and 75 min. The duration of the focus groups was approximately 40 min for teachers and between 30 and 45 min for students. In the case of volunteers, interviews lasted approximately 20 min.

Data collection techniques implemented in each school.

Participant teachers in the interviews and in the focus groups were selected based on their experience of implementing IGs and/or DLGs with students with and without SEN. All of them had been implementing IGs and/or DLGs and all of them had—at the moment of the data collection or in the past—students with SEN participating in IGs and/or DLGs together with students without SEN.

Two interviews with teachers were conducted, one in school 1 and one in school 3. They were female teachers in both cases. The teacher interviewed at school 1 was the school principal and a language teacher who implemented DLGs with the two sixth-grade classes, which contained five students with SEN. She had more than 10 years of experience facilitating IGs and DLGs. The teacher interviewed in school 3 taught the third grade of compulsory secondary education. In that class, eight students had SEN.

Two focus groups were held with teachers, one in school 1 and one in school 2. In school 1, four female teachers participated. One of them was a teacher in the first and second grades of primary education, another was a teacher in the third and fourth grades, and two more were teachers in the fifth and sixth grades. They had between 4 and 12 years of experience in the school implementing IGs and/or DLGs. In school 2, three female teachers participated. One of them was a teacher of first and second grade, another was a special education teacher, and the third was a teacher of second grade of compulsory secondary education and educational advisor. They had between 1 and 10 years of experience in the school implementing IGs and/or DLGs.

Three focus groups were held with students, two in school 1 and one in school 3. In school 1, one focus group was conducted with each of the two sixth-grade classes. They have been implementing IGs since second grade and DLGs since third grade. In these classes, cases of special needs included hearing impairment and intellectual disability (one boy), intellectual disability (one boy), dyslexia (two boys and one girl) and ADHD (one boy). Five students participated in the first focus group (three boys and two girls), and seven participated in the second focus group (five girls and two boys). In the first group, there was one girl and one boy with SEN, and in the second group, there was one boy with SEN. In school 3, one focus group was conducted with two girls: one in second grade of compulsory secondary education, and one in third grade of compulsory secondary education. Both participated in IGs and DLGs. One of them had special needs (a syndrome entailing visual and hearing impairment, as well as an intellectual disability) and participated in IGs and DLGs with her classmates without special needs, while the other student did not have SEN and had a classmate with autism who participated in IGs and DLGs along with the rest of the class.

Finally, two interviews were conducted in school 2 with two male volunteers who participated in IGs in classes containing students with and without SEN. One of them had taken part in IGs in preprimary and primary education classes for 2 years, while the other had participated in IGs for 3 years in fifth and sixth grades of primary education and in third grade of compulsory secondary education.

Both the interviews and the focus groups included questions regarding, on the one hand, the characteristics of the implementation of the interactive learning environments and, on the other, the impacts on the participating students. The data collection was conducted using a communicative orientation that involves creating the conditions for egalitarian dialogue between researchers and the end-users of research to reach a shared interpretation of the reality being studied ( Gómez et al., 2019 ). Sample questions for teachers and volunteers included: “How would you describe the interactions between students with SEN and their peers without SEN when they participate in IGs and/or DLGs?” “Have these interactions between students changed over time?” “Have you observed an impact on students that could be related to such interactions?” Sample questions for students were: “How do you work in IGs and DLGs with your classmates?,” “When you or some of your classmates have some difficulties when participating in IGs or DLGs, what do you do?,” “Have you improved on something since you have taken part in IGs and DLGs?,” “And your classmates?,” “Can you give an example?”

Before data collection, school boards and individual participants were informed about the aims of the research. All participants were informed that their participation was voluntary and that the data would be recorded anonymously. Informed consent was obtained from the participant teachers and community volunteers and from the parents or guardians of the minors. To ensure ethical integrity of the study, the research responded to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by UNESCO, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2000/C 364/01) regarding scientific and ethical procedures, the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity ( ALLEA, 2017 ), the Ethics Review Procedure established by the European Commission (2013) for EU research, and the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC. The study was fully approved by the Ethics Board of the Community of Researchers on Excellence for All (CREA).

Data Analysis

Interviews and focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcriptions were subsequently revised to identify the excerpts that referred to interactions between students with and without SEN that could indicate an impact on students without SEN. A second reading was conducted to identify recurrent themes that emerged from the excerpts, and three main themes were identified that led to the inductive creation of the three categories of analysis: (1) impact on students’ attitudes, (2) impact on students’ social skills, and (3) impact on students’ academic learning and cognitive development (see Table 2 ). One researcher coded the excerpts according to the categories created; some excerpts were assigned to more than one category. Subsequently, a second researcher revised the coded excerpts, taking into account the definition of the categories. The second researcher agreed on the coding and proposed the assignment of some of the citations to additional categories. The final coding was agreed upon by both researchers.

Categories of analysis.

The results of our analysis allowed us to identify a series of impacts for students without SEN of sharing interactive learning environments with students with SEN. According to the categories of analysis, our findings show that participating together in learning activities, mediated by interaction and dialogue, allows students without SEN to: (1) build understanding and respectful attitudes toward diversity; (2) learn about social abilities related to facilitating others’ learning; and (3) enhance opportunities for academic learning and cognitive development as a result of engaging in learning together, exchanging questions and knowledge. As seen in Table 2 , the category with a higher number of quotes is (1) impact on students’ attitudes, with more than half of the quotes referring to such an impact, followed by (2) impact on students’ social skills, and finally by (3) impact on students’ academic learning and cognitive development.

Building Positive Attitudes Toward Diversity in Interactive Learning Environments Shared With Peers With Special Needs

Category 1 included evidence regarding the attitudes of students without SEN toward students with SEN when they learned together in IGs and/or DLGs. Participants in the three schools, including teachers, students and volunteers, provided evidence in this regard.

When students without SEN share interactive learning environments with students with SEN, they have unique opportunities to learn firsthand about diversity. They share their learning time and space with peers of the same age, who often need special attention because of their individual characteristics, which differ to a greater or lesser extent and in different ways from those of most students. This is a necessary first step to develop positive attitudes on diversity and educational and social inclusion, which cannot be completely achieved when education on respect for diversity, valuing its potential, and educational and social inclusion is not based on the daily experiences of sharing these learning opportunities with individuals with SEN, who have a face and a name. However, interactive learning environments allow students to share not only learning space and time, but also interactions and dialogue around shared learning activities (such as solving a math problem or sharing a personal reflection on an excerpt from a book), which create opportunities to learn about diversity and its value based on the personal experiences of those individuals with whom the activity is shared. In this way, students can learn about diversity with those children who have not only a name and a face but also a personality, preferences, and struggles.

Ana, a secondary education student without SEN who has a classmate with autism spectrum disorder, Jose, explained that getting to know him in the school allowed her to learn about diversity in a way that she could not have done before:

• Until I first entered this school last year, I had no idea what the communication and language classroom was, I had no idea that there were people with ASD who could be in schools like this, I was not aware at all of this. However, when I arrived in this school, they put me in the class with Jose, and when I saw him, I said “wow” and I don’t know, from that moment on, he transmitted something to me that made me feel that he was special and that I was going to help him in some way. In addition, as time went by, Jose turned my life around. (Student, school 3)

The interactive learning environment fostered in the classroom, where students learn in dialogue with others, is, according to teachers, what generates the opportunity to acknowledge diversity, while students learn that it is part of human diversity and normalize it:

• I believe that it favors inclusion, for sure, because they talk constantly, leaving the classic model of children sitting alone, individually. So yes, they are all integrated. As she said, they always look the same to each other; they do know that one has more difficulties in one thing or another, but they all treat each other equally. (Teachers’ focus group, school 1)

Teachers in the different schools reported a change in attitudes in their students without SEN, who in the interactive learning environments learned about difference, learned to accept it, and to be more respectful about it. Teachers referred, on the one hand, to children’s acknowledgement of individual differences in their peers’ learning process, which became evident as learning activities were shared among the class, either in small interactive groups or in dialogic literary gatherings with the entire class. Students understood that children could learn at different paces and that they can need different kinds of support or adapted materials, but this does not mean that they cannot share the experience of learning; as one teacher explained: “a dynamic of respect and understanding that not everyone does the same has been created” (Teacher, school 1). Importantly, being aware of these differences does not turn into a stigmatization of students with SEN; in contrast, knowing them allows their peers to learn more about their weaknesses, and to better understand their performance in class. The example of shared reading activities illustrates this impact on students’ attitudes:

• And the other students, for me this is important, they respect their reading rhythm, they respect it, they know that, depending on which children, they go slowly because they have difficulties, but nobody says so, because we all know that they have difficulties and that they go at their own pace and, if they read it slowly, they understand it well. (Teacher, school 1)

Special needs can be related to areas of curricular learning, but can also be expressed in other ways. Teachers’ experience shows that in interactive learning environments, children learn to be more understanding about other types of difficulties, such as behavioral problems that their classmates may exhibit. Although it may sometimes be annoying, they develop the understanding that these children do not have, at that moment, the ability to behave better and learn to accept it, while teachers work to improve children’s ability to control their behavior. This is the case of what this teacher explained:

• There are days when these children—I’m thinking of another one who hasn’t taken the medication—then, he comes in very nervous, he doesn’t stop making noises, he doesn’t shut up. Obviously, holding the gatherings in these conditions is very hard, but they are there, and the group already understand that this child acts this way because he has no other way to do it. Therefore, I think that they have all learned to accept the difference. (Teacher, school 1)

Overall, these episodes show the opportunities created for children without SEN to better understand children with SEN, to be more sensitive to others’ needs, and to be more empathetic. From the perspective of teachers, interactive learning environments such as DLGs entail the learning of values that facilitate the transformation of attitudes. These values emerge from the reading of classic works of literature, which is characteristic of a DLG, where topics such as love, friendship, truth, loyalty, and courage become part of the debate:

• In the gatherings many values arise, students work a lot on values and then have a more complete experience, and they share, and they make. They feel empathy for each other. (.) in the classroom it is very difficult for them to put themselves in the other’s place (.) but in the gatherings it isn’t, empathy does come out. (Teacher, school 1)

This learning of values and empathy is also related to the fact that in DLGs, children often link the episodes of reading to episodes about their own lives or other realities they know of. This is how children expressed this idea in their own way:

• Because when we give our opinion in the gatherings, sometimes he explains something of his life, and so when he says it, we know slightly more about him, and he says more and more things about his life, and so we get to know each other better and become [better] friends, because in this way we get to know each other much more easily. (Student, school 1)

In this process of knowing their classmates with SEN better as a result of sharing interactive learning environments, children also learn that each individual has different abilities, that all of them may need help at some point, and can help others as well, and that the best learning outcomes are obtained when they share these abilities and help each other. IGs facilitate this process, as in IGs all group members are expected to ensure that all other members understand the activity and complete it; therefore, everyone shares the knowledge and abilities they have and that can contribute to the group work. Teachers in one of the schools reflected on this idea, which also contributed to the change of perceptions and attitudes mentioned, as typically developing students realize that students with SEN have challenges but also have abilities: “In those moments they have truly helped each other. Then, they have realized that it is not always the same people who have to help, but they, who have a challenge, are good at it.” (Teachers’ focus group, school 1)

This acknowledgement of diversity (including difficulties, but also possibilities and diverse abilities), which is due to sharing interactive learning environments, facilitates overcoming prejudices. Students with SEN start to be seen not only as those with poor learning, that always struggle and usually need help, but also as students who are capable of learning and making progress, as one teacher noted:

• Academically brilliant boys and girls, who perhaps in third grade looked at these classmates and even knowing them since they were in preschool [3 or 4 years old] thought, “Well, this is clear, they don’t know anything,” have made a positive change because they see these children as classmates with the possibility of learning. (Teacher, school 1)

As shown in this quote from a teacher’s interview, it was not the fact of being educated in the same classroom with SEN students that shaped a realistic perception of their difficulties and capabilities (since both SEN and typically developing students had been educated together for years). Rather the opportunity to learn in interactions with SEN students allowed students without SEN to transform their perceptions and attitudes. Along the same lines, in view of Ana, sharing learning opportunities with her classmate Jose entailed learning that everyone has both difficulties and abilities, and that these can be overcome:

• Jose has taught me that many times people have barriers, because we all have barriers, whether it is at the time of learning, at the time of adults finding a job. Whatever, anything, but there is always a way to overcome them, always, and Jose has taught me many things. In fact, I think he has taught me more than I have taught him. (Student, school 3)

This involved shifting the focus from difficulties to possibilities and transforming learning expectations toward them. Importantly, the peer group learned that students with SEN were not only able to learn, but also contributed to the learning of others, which reinforces this change in expectations and the overcoming of prejudices. This might help typically developing students learn to value people not only based on their more evident characteristics—as may be the case with SEN in the school context—but also to pay attention to other traits (which are sometimes hidden) that can give a broader picture of a person and allow for identifying other enriching features. According to teachers, interactive learning environments such as IGs and DLGs permit this to happen:

• And from that moment on, I think, that’s when we all realized that children like Javi can participate by making very good contributions, and that girls like Laura don’t know everything. I think that this was a very important moment. (Teacher, school 1)

Further, this greater knowledge of peers with SEN and the development of respect for diversity has led in some cases to the blossoming of new friendships. Ana talked about her special relationship with Jose as something that makes going to school more meaningful for her: “And one of the reasons why I love coming to school is to have Jose’s smile there every morning (.) and it’s something I wouldn’t change for anything in the world” (Student, school 3). Blanca, a girl with SEN in the same secondary school, explained something similar in terms of when she thinks of her classmate and friend Jaume:

• Like Ana said, she is very happy with Jose. I am exactly the same with Jaume (.) I am very happy with him and I am happy to have him as a friend, and he is special and very important to me. (Student, school 3)

The building of these friendships not only has had an impact within the school, but has also transferred and expanded the benefits of interactions between students with and without disabilities to new contexts outside school premises and across time, as a teacher in that school explained:

• [His] friendship within the school [was] prolonged on weekends (.) He has come to meet [his] friends of the classroom to go out to dinner 1 day, to see a movie and that is very interesting (.) I think the fact of having worked in groups has facilitated doing things, not only in his group of six, because these groups have been changing more or less. (Teacher, school 3)

Learning Social Skills Related to Helping Others Participate and Learn

Category 2 included evidence regarding an impact on the social abilities of students without SEN as a result of learning together with students with SEN in IGs and/or DLGs. Participants in the three schools, including teachers, students and volunteers, offered evidence in this regard.

In addition to the transformation of thoughts, attitudes and the acknowledgment of others’ abilities and difficulties, engaging in learning interactions with peers with SEN helps to develop a series of social skills. Children acquire these skills because they are necessary to interact with their classmates in IGs and DLGs, specially with those with SEN. These interactive learning environments pose this demand, and these skills become part of the repertoire of abilities that children can use in multiple contexts and with diverse people. First, in interactive learning environments such as IGs and DLGs, children are expected to help each other; thus, children progressively get used to and develop this ability to support their peers, as well as receiving help when necessary. Both teachers and volunteers reflected on the way children learned about this ability through time: “Last year I did notice a change, yes (.) in the end they learn to collaborate, above all, to help each other, and that it goes well, and the work comes out, which is what we are looking for.” (Volunteer, school 2)

With the practice of helping each other in interactive and diverse learning environments, children come to see that collaboration among all helps everyone’s learning, as it allows for one to take advantage of the diverse abilities in the group; therefore, they become progressively more motivated and more proficient in this activity:

• Everyone has some skills; some have some skills for one thing and others have some skills and some abilities for another. After all, if there is a collaboration between all, it is where you have to reach an end, and they help each other to reach this end. (Teacher, school 2)

Once they acquire this ability, they use it to help anyone who needs it, including children with more learning difficulties; they normalize helping others and realize they can make a difference in the learning opportunities of the students with the most difficulties. Therefore, and as a volunteer explained, all students in her class were willing to help those who were more in need: “Yes, let’s say, the whole group was dedicated to helping them” (Volunteer, school 2). Consequently, when they share learning activities with students who especially struggle with learning, they find the opportunity to strengthen this ability to help. Blanca explained something similar when not just one, but three classmates went to help her with the activity:

• For example, in History, we also do [interactive] groups. We were doing a mapping exercise and (.) I got lost a little bit, then I asked my classmate sitting next to me to help me and so on, then she came to help me, then two more came to help me, and I was happy because I did not make myself clear, I got nervous, I did not know how to do it, then (.) they came to help me (.), and that is the best thing about being in a group. (Student, school 3)

Second, in this attempt to help their peers with SEN and facilitate their participation in interactive learning environments, they learn to adjust their interactions to the particular needs of each child. For instance, they learn to be patient and to give the necessary time when their peers have a slower learning pace, which is an evidence of the empathy developed:

• In the gatherings they have also learned to give time. For example, a girl I have in class has a hard time explaining herself, but in the end, she gets it out. Therefore, they have learned to be patient with her and not to stand up and let her talk. Then, in the end, they realize that she does, that she gets out, that she explains well. (Teacher, school 1)

In this regard, they learn to provide adjusted support, building on the abilities they acknowledge in these peers, and try to find alternative ways so that these children can participate in the activity. This entails a metacognitive effort when they try to understand what these children know and how they can help them participate in the activity and progress in their learning.

• The atmosphere in the classroom, when there is a group with a child with SEN, the others, as they live it in their daily life, apart from understanding the difficulty he has and stay on their level, they also look for ways in which he can participate and get involved in some way in the activity. (Teacher, school 1)

This effort to facilitate the learning and participation of children with SEN becomes part of the class routine. so as the teachers explained, it unites the group around this shared purpose and the group members become more sensitive to the needs of their peers. This is also achieved thanks to the guidance that teachers and volunteers provide in order to help typically developing students adjust the support they offer to their SEN peers, and also to encourage typically developing students to help their SEN peers while avoiding overprotection:

• In other words, their classmates, or at least what I experience from my class, they are very supportive and, as Maria said, they are very sensitive on this subject. In this case, I have two students [with SEN], and they take care of them, not too much, because they must be reminded to let them think, too. However, they do take them very much into account in regard to working in [interactive] groups. They try to make sure they can participate like everyone else. Of course, within their possibilities. (Teacher, school 1)

As a result, the situations created not only turn into a higher ability to help others, but also in the satisfaction of seeing others learn better due to their help, which reinforces this behavior. Teachers noted this impact on children: “They help each other and it is going very well; and they love it, it is something they like very much” (Teacher, school 2), as well as students themselves: “And, when you help him and you see that he understood it, you feel satisfied” (Student, school 2). “When I help Joan or even when Joan helps me more, I feel more fulfilled with myself, happier” (Student, school 3). Such rewarding experiences motivates them to continue participating in these activities and to help others, which benefits everyone’s learning.

Enhancing the Opportunities for Academic Learning and Cognitive Development

Category 3 included evidence regarding opportunities for the academic learning and cognitive development of students without SEN when they learned together with students with SEN in IGs and/or DLGs. Participants in school 1 and school 2, including teachers, students and volunteers, mentioned this type of impact.

Sharing learning activities with students with SEN in interactive learning environments triggers an additional cognitive effort for typically developing children when they try to explain themselves to their peers with SEN. It entails, on the one hand, putting oneself in the other’s shoes, trying to understand his/her difficulties and thinking of how to help him/her overcome these difficulties, thus gaining from the cognitive effort made and reinforcing their learning. On the other hand, it also entails discovering one’s own difficulties when trying to make oneself be understood and to do one’s best to achieve it. In this regard, such situations allow students who do not usually have learning challenges to experience them, and underscore the need to make an effort to achieve their objective, which contributes to being more empathetic and understanding of their peers with SEN and, sometimes, humbler regarding their own abilities, as one volunteer explained:

• They do this effort of trying to make them be understood by the other, and this is very interesting, as the know-it-all can see his/her own limitations with respect to the others. Therefore, it demands a much greater effort from oneself than usual. (Volunteer, school 2)

In addition, in interactive learning environments, students without SEN can learn from the explanations and contributions of children with SEN. IGs and DLGs are characterized by promoting a framework of open and egalitarian dialogue where all contributions are valued based on validity claims (i.e., the value of the contribution’s content, regardless of who made the contribution, and in this case, regardless of whether it is a student with or without SEN). Learning from students with SEN can occur both in IGs and in DLGs when these students have a good understanding of the concepts they are working on. As noted by one teacher, these episodes are opportunities for the entire group to learn:

• Children with many special difficulties, have been the ones who have given the clarification, the definition, the explanation for the rest of the group to understand, and this has created a situation, which is not seen, but it is noticed, of improvement for all. (Teacher, school 1)

In DLGs, it also occurs when children with SEN share the paragraph or idea they selected to bring to the gathering, or when they raise doubts about the meaning of particular words that other students had not paid attention to—although they might not understand it either—and this opens up a debate on the meaning of that word or on the ideas of that paragraph that may have not existed without the participation of these children. In the following quote from a teacher, we find first a reference to those situations when a child with SEN does not understand something and their peers explain it to him/her, provoking the additional cognitive effort of trying to make something be understood. Next, we find the reference to these other situations when children with SEN contribute to the group bringing their questions, doubts, and interventions to the gathering, opening a learning opportunity for all:

• If they do not understand it, their classmates explain the meaning to them. Then, when we do this rereading of the chapter or the pages, other vocabulary words often appear that, perhaps nobody had chosen or they do not know the meaning of, and then another debate starts about knowing what it means. Or someone raises their hand and says, “I had not chosen this because when I read it perhaps it did not catch my attention, but now when I reread the chapter, I want to comment on it,” and right after it is commented on. This is done both by children with SEN and by the rest of the class, regardless of their level of ability and everything else. A climate is created that is similar to magic. (Teacher, school 1)

According to the participants’ experiences, interactive learning environments shared between students with and without SEN create the opportunity for all to acknowledge that everyone has abilities and difficulties. Children with SEN can surprise others with their questions, responses, and contributions, generating new opportunities for learning, and everyone can learn that children without SEN do not always know everything. As one teacher explained based on her experience over the years, the fact that children with SEN share interactive learning environments with their peers without SEN has not only benefitted these SEN children, but also the dynamics of the classroom, as it is enriched with diversity, and therefore becomes a benefit for all:

• The fact that these children are in the group—and I can talk about it already for the past 4 years—has improved the dynamics of the gatherings. I think it has been beneficial for everyone, and I am sure it has, because they make interventions that even they themselves are often surprised to have made, and their peers have seen this. (Teacher, school 1)

Interactive groups and DLGs are interactive learning environments that have already been demonstrated to be inclusive and lead to positive academic and social impacts for students with SEN ( Duque et al., 2020 ). The study presented here is the first to analyze the potential impacts of IGs and DLGs on students without SEN when they share these interactive learning environments with students with SEN. The results of our study show that students without SEN can benefit from participating in interactive learning environments (such as IGs and DLGs) with peers with SEN in at least three different ways: (1) building positive attitudes as they learn to respect others, accept differences, and acknowledge different abilities, creating opportunities for new friendships; (2) enhancing their social skills, as they learn about abilities related to helping others participate and learn, to be patient, and gain satisfaction from helping others learn; and (3) producing opportunities to enhance academic learning and foster cognitive development, as they gain from the cognitive effort needed to explain themselves and from the contributions of peers with SEN from which they can learn. Importantly, we did not find negative impacts for students without SEN or for those with SEN as a result of sharing these interactive learning environments. In contrast, all impacts identified—either at the attitudinal, social, or cognitive level—were positive for both groups of students.

In the cases studied, children without SEN developed positive attitudes toward diversity in IGs and DLGs. This is in the line of previous research which found that inclusive educational environments are related to more positive attitudes toward diversity, and especially more positive attitudes among typically developing peers toward children with disabilities or other SEN ( Smith and Williams, 2001 ; Beckett, 2009 ). It is also consistent with research that found that solidarity can be learned in the school context and that it contributes to creating genuine attitudes of inclusion beyond the norms that benefit everyone ( Hernández Arteaga et al., 2020 ).

Additionally, we found that students without SEN had the opportunity to develop social skills when they learned together with students with SEN in IGs and DLGs. Identifying particular types of classroom arrangements and learning dynamics (such as IGs and DLGs) that help one to cultivate such attitudes and skills is important not only for students with SEN—who are more respected, accepted, and integrated in their group of peers—but also beneficial for students without SEN. Attitudes of understanding diverse identities; the values of justice, equality, dignity and respect; cognitive skills (including the ability to adopt a multiperspective approach); social skills (such as empathy and conflict resolution), communication skills and aptitudes for interacting with diverse people, and the capacity to act collaboratively and responsibly have been highlighted as key competences necessary in the 21st century ( UNESCO, 2014 ).

Moreover, we found a positive impact of the interactive learning environments created with IGs and DLGs on opportunities for the learning and cognitive development of children without SEN. This is in line with previous research comparing the learning outcomes of students without SEN, who are educated with students with SEN, and those who are not, which overall revealed no negative impacts on these students but, on the contrary, positive impacts or neutral in the worst cases ( Kalambouka et al., 2007 ; Ruijs and Peetsma, 2009 ; Szumski et al., 2017 ; Kefallinou et al., 2020 ).

These findings should be taken cautiously. On the one hand, because the study is based on a reduced sample, the conclusions cannot be generalized. On the other hand, because data were collected in schools that were already implementing IGs and DLGs, a pre-post intervention comparison cannot be made to ascertain the changes that occurred in students without SEN due to sharing IGs and DLGs with students with SEN. Finally, the qualitative nature of the data facilitates an understanding of the reality studied but does not allow for a precise assessment of the impacts on students without SEN. Subsequent research could expand the analysis to a broader sample and include an examination of quantitative data, especially of students’ academic progress, since the third category of analysis (impact on students’ academic learning and cognitive development) is the one for which we obtained the least evidence.

However, as the first study on this topic, this research enables an initial approximation based on the participants’ experiences, which is consistent with previous knowledge and can be the basis for further investigation. First, it is in line with the results of previous research on DLGs and IGs which shows their impact on improving students’ academic learning, a better understanding of others and positive coexistence ( García-Carrión, 2015 ; García-Carrión and Díez-Palomar, 2015 ; Garcia et al., 2018 ; Valero et al., 2018 ; Foncillas et al., 2020 ; Zubiri-Esnaola et al., 2020 ). Our study suggests that sharing IGs and DLGs with students with SEN creates new conditions in which these improvements can be promoted. Second, it is aligned with past research on inclusion, which has associated the benefits of inclusive education with classroom practices characterized by interaction, dialogue, and collaboration ( Kefallinou et al., 2020 ), all of which are characteristics of IGs and DLGs and could thus explain the benefits observed. Third, it is in line with theoretical contributions that refer to the relevant role of peer help and other forms of sharing learning interactions. When children try to explain learning content to their peers with SEN or try to help them solve a problem, they expand what Vygotsky called the zone of proximal development (1978) or what Bruner called scaffolding (1996). Both authors emphasized (stemming from the sociocultural theory of learning) the importance of interactions for children’s learning and argued that these interactions could emerge not only from adults but also from more capable peers. Interactions allow for the creation of shared learning ( Mercer and Littleton, 2007 ), and our data indicate that more capable peers can also benefit from these interactions and find opportunities to advance their learning and cognitive development. Indeed, research has suggested thinking of the zone of proximal development not in terms of knowledge transmission, but as an encounter of consciousness that mutually benefits the participants in the interaction ( Roth and Radford, 2010 ).

Although further research is necessary to have a more precise description of the impact of IGs and DLGs for students without SEN when they share these learning environments with students with SEN, the evidence presented can contribute to the understanding that inclusive education not only benefits the most vulnerable students (such as students with disabilities and other SENs), but can also benefit all students when interactions and dialogue are promoted in contexts of diversity. Therefore, it is the right of everyone—with or without SEN—to be educated in inclusive, interactive learning environments, as they produce unique conditions for the academic and human development of all students.

Data Availability Statement

Ethics statement.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Ethics Board of the Community of Researchers on Excellence for All (CREA). Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardian/next of kin.

Author Contributions

RF conceptualized the research. SM conducted the literature review, a preliminary analysis of the data, and a first draft of the manuscript. JM revised the data analysis. RF, AA, and JM revised the manuscript and provided feedback and corrections. SM revised the final version of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding. This study was funded by INTER-ACT: Interactive learning environments for the inclusion of students with and without disabilities: improving learning, development and relationships, The Spanish National Program for Research Aimed at the Challenges of Society, Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness. Reference Number: EDU2017-88666-R.

• ALLEA (2017). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Available online at: https://www.allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ALLEA-European-Code-of-Conduct-for-Research-Integrity-2017.pdf [accessed January 5, 2021] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beckett A. E. (2009). Challenging disabling attitudes, building an inclusive society: considering the role of education in encouraging non-disabled children to develop positive attitudes towards disabled people. Br. J. Sociol. Educ. 30 317–329. 10.1080/01425690902812596 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bruner J. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duque E., Gairal R., Molina S., Roca E. (2020). How psychology of education contributes to research with social impact on the education of students with special needs: the case of successful educational actions. Front. Psychol. 11 : 439 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• European Commission (2013). Ethics for Researchers. Facilitating Research Excellence in FP7. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/fp7/89888/ethics-for-researchers_en.pdf [accessed January 5, 2021] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fernández-Villardón A., Álvarez P., Ugalde L., Tellado I. (2020). Fostering the social development of children with special educational needs or disabilities (send) through dialogue and interaction: a literature review. Soc. Sci. 9 : 97 . 10.3390/socsci9060097 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flecha R. (2000). Sharing Words: Theory and Practice of Dialogic Learning. Lanham, M.D: Rowman & Littlefield. [ Google Scholar ]
• Flecha R. (2015). Successful Educational Action for Inclusion and Social Cohesion in Europe. Berlin: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Foncillas M., Santiago-Garabieta M., Tellado I. (2020). Análisis de las tertulias literarias dialógicas en educación primaria: un estudio de caso a través de las voces y dibujos argumentados del alumnado. Multidisciplinary J. Educ. Res. 10 205–225. 10.17583/remie.2020.5645 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garcia C., Gairal R., Munté A., Plaja T. (2018). Dialogic literary gatherings and out-of-home child care: creation of new meanings through classic literature. Child Fam. Soc. Work 23 62–70. 10.1111/cfs.12384 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• García-Carrión R. (2015). What the dialogic literary gatherings did for me. Qualitative Inquiry 21 913–919. 10.1177/1077800415614305 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• García-Carrión R., Díez-Palomar J. (2015). Learning communities: pathways for educational success and social transformation through interactive groups in mathematics. Eur. Educ. Res. J. 14 151–166. 10.1177/1474904115571793 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• García-Carrión R., López, de Aguileta G., Padrós M., Ramis-Salas M. (2020). Implications for social impact of dialogic teaching and learning. Front. Psychol. 11 : 140 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gómez A., Padrós M., Ríos O., Mara L. C., Pukepuke T. (2019). Reaching social impact through communicative methodology. researching with rather than on vulnerable populations: the roma case. Front. Educ. 4 : 9 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Grütter J., Gasser L., Malti T. (2017). The role of cross-group friendship and emotions in adolescents’ attitudes towards inclusion. Res. Dev. Disabil. 62 137–147. 10.1016/j.ridd.2017.01.004 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hernández Arteaga I., Fernández López K. M., Estela Vasquez A. C., Mestizo Nuzcue E. J. (2020). Educación y solidaridad: un camino hacia la inclusión educativa. Soc. Educ. History 9 227–251. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hienonen N., Lintuvuori M., Jahnukainen M., Hotulainen R., Vainikainen M. P. (2018). The effect of class composition on cross-curricular competences – Students with special educational needs in regular classes in lower secondary education. Learn. Instruction 58 80–87. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.05.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalambouka A., Farrell P., Dyson A., Kaplan I. (2007). The impact of placing pupils with special educational needs in mainstream schools on the achievement of their peers. Educ. Res. 49 365–382. 10.1080/00131880701717222 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kefallinou A., Symeonidou S., Meijer C. J. W. (2020). Understanding the value of inclusive education and its implementation: a review of the literature. Prospects 49 135–152. 10.1007/s11125-020-09500-2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kurth J. A., Miller A. L., Toews S. G., Thompson J. R., Cortés M., Dahal M. H., et al. (2018). Inclusive education: perspectives on implementation and practice from international experts. Intellect. Dev. Disabil. 56 471–485. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mercer N., Littleton K. (2007). Dialogue and the Development of Children’s Thinking, a Socio-Cultural Approach. Milton Park: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Messiou K. (2017). Research in the field of inclusive education: time for a rethink? Int. J. Inclusive Educ. 21 146–159. 10.1080/13603116.2016.1223184 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Oh-Young C., Filler J. (2015). A meta-analysis of the effects of placement on academic and social skill outcome measures of students with disabilities. Res. Dev. Disabil. 47 80–92. 10.1016/j.ridd.2015.08.014 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roth W. M., Radford L. (2010). Re/thinking the zone of proximal development (Symmetrically). Mind Cult. Act. 17 299–307. 10.1080/10749031003775038 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ruijs N. M., Peetsma T. T. D. (2009). Effects of inclusion on students with and without special educational needs reviewed. Educ. Res. Rev. 4 67–79. 10.1016/j.edurev.2009.02.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith L. A., Williams J. M. (2001). Children’s understanding of the physicals cognitive and social consequences of impairments. Child Care Health Dev. 27 603–617. 10.1046/j.1365-2214.2001.00236.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Smogorzewska J., Szumski G., Grygiel P. (2020). Theory of mind goes to school: does educational environment influence the development of theory of mind in middle childhood? PLoS One 15 : e0237524 . 10.1371/journal.pone.0237524 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Szumski G., Smogorzewska J., Karwowski M. (2017). Academic achievement of students without special educational needs in inclusive classrooms: a meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 21 33–54. 10.1016/j.edurev.2017.02.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tafa E., Manolitsis G. (2003). Attitudes of Greek parents of typically developing kindergarten children towards inclusive education. Eur. J. Special Needs Educ. 18 155–171. 10.1080/0885625032000078952 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for action on special needs education: Adopted by the World Conference on Special Needs Education, Access and Quality. Paris: UNESCO. [ Google Scholar ]
• UNESCO (2014). Global Citizenship Education. Preparing learners for the challenges of the 21st century. Paris: UNESCO. [ Google Scholar ]
• UNESCO (2017). A Guide for Ensuring Inclusion and Equity in Education. Paris: UNESCO. [ Google Scholar ]
• United Nations (2007). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Available online at: https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html [accessed January 5, 2021] [ Google Scholar ]
• Valero D., Redondo-Sama G., Elboj C. (2018). Interactive groups for immigrant students: a factor for success in the path of immigrant students. Int. J. Inclusive Educ. 22 787–802. 10.1080/13603116.2017.1408712 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vygotsky L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: the Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Boston: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zubiri-Esnaola H., Vidu A., Rios-Gonzalez O., Morla-Folch T. (2020). Inclusivity, participation and collaboration: learning in interactive groups. Educ. Res. 62 162–180. 10.1080/00131881.2020.1755605 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Enhancing schools’ development activities on inclusive education through in-service training course for school teams: a case study.

• Institute of Education, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia

Most countries face the challenge of reconstructing their education systems to ensure equitable quality education for all children in inclusive settings. This challenge is also relevant in Estonia, the context of this study. A long-term in-service training course for school teams (school leaders, support specialists, and teachers) was developed and implemented in Estonia. The main goal of the training course was to develop attitudes, skills, and knowledge of school staff about the concept and meaning of inclusive education (IE) and the effective implementation through inclusive school development strategies. The aim of the current study was to find out how the in-service training course for school teams influences system-wide changes in the implementation of IE at the school level and what factors affect it. Purposeful sampling (two schools) was used, and the qualitative thematic case study research method was chosen to find answers to the research questions. Data were collected from school policy documents, homework assignments of the training course, semi-structured interviews in the middle and at the end of the training course, open-ended questionnaires at the end of the training course, and researcher diary. The results showed that the in-service training course for school teams enhanced cultural and structural changes at the school level. These changes were influenced by factors such as leadership, collaboration, commitment, and contribution of different parties, system-wide approach, resources, and external expertise. The implications of these findings are discussed further in the paper.

Introduction

Inclusive education (IE) as a human right ( United Nations, 2006 ) has been ideologically accepted in most countries currently. Nevertheless, many countries are still making efforts restructuring their education systems to provide high-quality education for all learners in inclusive settings. This is complicated by the fact that education systems of different countries are based on deep rooted historical and cultural specificities ( Ainscow and Miles, 2008 ). However, profound changes in the education system require a fundamental transformation of key aspects, ways of thinking, and practices in education. Thus, policymaking, teacher education, school management, and cooperation between different school stakeholders need to change ( Arcidiacono and Baucal, 2020 ).

The literature reviews show that inclusive school development has focused primarily on teachers’ readiness to cope with special educational needs students (SEN) in an inclusive classroom ( Van Mieghem et al., 2018 ; Hansen et al., 2020 ). Teachers’ knowledge and skills play an important role in implementing inclusive classroom practice. As the implementation of IE is a very complex and multifaceted process ( Mitchell, 2015 ; Schuelka and Engsig, 2020 ), there are many factors at different levels of education systems that influence a meaningful implementation of IE. The OECD report ( OECD, 2003 ) emphasizes the principle that teaching SEN students is a matter a whole school, not just individual teachers. Ainscow and Miles (2008) have pointed out that, in addition to what is happening at the class level, a school culture and the commitment of all school staff members are equally important. This complex and multifaceted act requires consciously targeted effort and particular ways of leading ( Carter and Abawi, 2018 ). Ainscow and Sandill (2010) emphasize that cultural changes in the workplace affect how teachers view their work and students. Additionally, school policy that support school-wide structural changes is equally important ( Hadfield and Ainscow, 2018 ; Ainscow, 2020 ). In order to design inclusive schools, the key capacity building strategy is enhancing cross-professional collaboration ( Hansen et al., 2020 ). A school-wide training approach, collaboration between teachers and support professionals, collaboration and support from school leaders and resource centers, including universities, promotes the implementation of different characteristics of inclusive education at the school level ( Harris and Jones, 2017 ; Juma et al., 2017 ). Bjørnsrud and Nilsen (2019) have pointed out that collective learning in teams paves the way for joint planning with preparation, a common language, observation in the classroom, and new ideas with actions for pupils’ learning. Moreover, the need for research on how to support and advise schools in developing the organization, in collaboration with researchers and practitioners, has been highlighted ( Grima-Farrell and Mcdonagh, 2011 ). Therefore, in addition to teachers’ pre- and in-service training courses, in-service training for school teams of different professionals (teachers, support specialists, school leaders) could help to address these complex challenges.

In this paper, we report on a study that was conducted in Estonia where inclusive education has become an important field of research (see, e.g., Leijen et al., 2021 ; Pedaste et al., 2021 ). Moreover, the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 report emphasized that, in Estonia, professional development of both teachers and school leaders regarding the successful implementing of IE needs to be enhanced ( OECD, 2020 ). Consequently, developing the teaching quality of IE curriculums at teacher training universities in Estonia has become one of the key priorities. Studies conducted in Estonia have shown that there is a need for different kind of training courses. For example, courses for teachers to develop the competencies needed to teach students with different abilities, training for support professionals on their changed role in implementing IE, but also training for school leaders to structure the inclusive school development process ( Kivirand et al., 2020 ). Therefore, attention has been paid to composing new training courses at the two main teacher training universities in Estonia. In addition to modernizing initial and in-service training courses for teachers on specific topics of IE, an in-service training program was designed for school teams, involving all key actors at school level who play an important role in the meaningful implementation of IE. More precisely, a long-term (60 ECTS) in-service training program on IE was designed, which included a separate course for teachers (24 ECTS), joint courses for teachers and support specialists (26 ECTS), and a joint course for school teams, i.e., teachers, support specialists, and school leaders (10 ECTS; see Kivirand et al., 2021 ). The main goal of the school teams training course was to develop (1) positive attitudes toward IE and (2) skills and knowledge about the concept and meaning of IE and its effective implementation through inclusive school development strategies. The general principles of the training course were to link theory to practice and raise schools’ capacities to implement IE during the training sessions and designing long-term development activities. We took into consideration that reconstructing the school culture and practice on IE is a very multifaceted and long-term process. To support schools’ development through in-service training, it is important to address all relevant topics in a coherent and cyclical way over a longer-term period. The training was conducted over a period of 1.5 years (for further information see Kivirand et al., 2021 ).

In this paper, we will explore how the long-term in-service training course for school teams (teachers, support specialists, and school leaders) influenced schools’ development activities in the implementation of IE and what factors affected the implementation from the perspective of the school teams. In the following section, we will introduce the rationale and the theoretical background of the developed course and present the research questions of the study.

Professional Development of Staff Members on IE

Effective implementation of IE is a multi-faceted endeavor that requires the involvement of all those involved in the school, and above all motivated teachers and a positive attitude to IE ( Kaur et al., 2015 ). So far, teacher education in IE has often focused on increasing teacher-specific didactical competences to cope with children with SEN. It has been stressed that professional development for teachers should pay more attention to build on collaboration and collegial interactions ( Mangope and Mukhopadhyay, 2015 ). According to Forlin and Sin (2017) , the development of teacher competencies, as a curriculum for professional learning, requires a number of key principles, including:

• engaging teachers, leaders, and other stakeholders in dialogue regarding which competencies are required;

• developing a vision for professional learning that is integrated into system-wide; and

• whole-school planning.

The sense of a cohesive school community, cooperation between teachers, and support professionals plays an important role in the implementation of meaningful and child-centered IE ( Engelbrecht et al., 2017 ). Evidence shows that many countries face the challenge of how special needs educators could support teachers in inclusive classrooms ( Florian, 2019 ). The transition from integration to inclusion requires a relevant conceptual change for modifying the role of the support teacher with regard to implementing inclusion. In addition to the traditional individual support for children with special needs, there is an increasing role for support professionals in supporting, advising, and collaborating in teaching ( Perez et al., 2017 ). The content of teachers’ and special educators’ training has frequently focused on how to differentiate teaching of SEN students in the mainstream schools rather than on working with all students in an inclusive classroom.

In addition, school leaders play a critical role in creating conditions that positively impact school performance in inclusive practice ( Ainscow and Sandill, 2010 ; Al-Mahdy and Emam, 2017 ; Amin and Yasin, 2018 ). They must prioritize equity and excellence for all through their decision-making which affects learner groupings, staff allocation, access to curriculum and accreditation opportunities, and resource allocation ( Harris and Jones, 2017 ; European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2019 ). School leaders should take a leading role in promoting positive attitudes toward IE and innovation processes when applying inclusive education in everyday practice ( Urton et al., 2014 ). In addition, Skoglund and Stäcker (2016) emphasize that main tasks of school leaders are to set directions for staff and organizational development. Therefore, educational leaders’ values, beliefs, and perceptions toward inclusive education have a large impact on how other stakeholders view inclusion ( Cherkowski and Ragoonaden, 2016 ; Al-Mahdy and Emam, 2017 ). Schools are successful and provide high-quality education to all students if school leaders themselves enact the school with an inclusive vision and values, while motivating the entire staff to apply an inclusive approach ( Schuelka et al., 2018 ; Kivirand et al., 2021 ). Studies have shown that school leaders principally value the philosophy of inclusion ( Bayrakci et al., 2017 ; Murphy, 2018 ), but the problems are reflected in their knowledge, skills, and leadership styles of how to design inclusive organizations ( Amin and Yasin, 2018 ; Carter and Abawi, 2018 ).

Therefore, in order to succeed in the whole-school system-wide development activities in the field of IE, the professional development and cooperation of all parties is important. An in-service training course for school teams could provide a good opportunity to raise capabilities of all school level parties and opportunities to enhance research-based collaboration between schools and universities ( Kivirand et al., 2021 ). In the following section, we will look at what theoretical starting points we used as a basis for designing in-service training for the school teams (teachers, support specialists, and school leaders).

Designing the In-Service Training Course for School Teams

Kinsella, 2020 emphasizes that ensuring high-quality education for all children in an inclusive classroom (including children with SEN) depends primarily on the extent to which the entire school staff pays attention to the development of the organization. Changes in the whole school culture and politics require a reflective practice of both the individual and the entire staff, and the key to the success of the collaborator’s problem-solving is team-learning. Hereby it must be considered that the education system as a whole and the school as an organization is a very complex multi-layered socio-cultural system. Thus, development activities must consider many different characteristics that cover all levels of this ecosystem ( Haug, 2020 ; Kinsella, 2020 ; Schuelka and Engsig, 2020 ). Therefore, we based the design of the in-service training course for school teams on the ecosystem model for supporting IE developed by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (EASNIE) that was previously developed based on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system model ( European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2017 ). More specifically, according to this model’s key indicators from meso-system (school level), like leadership, continuum of support, collaboration, professionalism of staff, ethic for everybody and family involvement, were combined with the exo-system around the school, i.e., community commitment and working together with other professionals outside of schools. Finally, macro-system indicators, like state legislation and policy, governance and funding, monitoring and quality assurance, were also taken into account.

The main goal of the school teams training course was to raise the school staff’s awareness about the concept and meaning of IE and its effective implementation through inclusive school development strategies. Schools were first introduced to IE principles and following they analyzed their specific context and planned developmental activities related to IE based on the need of their schools. The elements of three necessary dimensions, like creating inclusive cultures, producing inclusive policies, and exploring inclusive practices, described in the guidebook Index for inclusion ( Booth and Ainscow, 2002 ), were used. Although this document has been widely used in many countries, it was considered that the different models developed cannot be replicated one by one, but the local context must be taken into account ( Loreman, 2014 ). Thus, the indicators and questionnaires described in the above-mentioned document were partially used and adapted to the Estonian context. For example, indicators of school culture were translated and mapping of the schools’ contexts in this dimension. An additional source used in the training course was the self-assessment questionnaire addressing key issues at classroom and organization level developed by EASNIE ( European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2017 ). This instrument supported schools to assess the situation with regard to students and school staff, partnership and collaboration, and the role of school leaders.

Finally, a co-creative approach in designing the training course was used to ensure the topics we chose for the training course for school teams made sense and were meaningful for teachers, support specialists, and school leaders. An initial outline of the training course was introduced to and discussed with the participants before the training course. For example, schools expressed the view that the training should address issues of how to work together to set common goals for meaningful implementation of IE, how to create support systems for both students, and teachers to ensure effective teaching in an inclusive classroom. At the same time, the participants’ expectation was that the joint training of the different schools will preserve the autonomy and contextual specificity of each school. According to Vyas et al. (2014) , a multi-disciplinary co-creation in the designing process can lead to harmonious work where the insight and previous experiences of the participants provide useful input to the practical research framework.

Based on the abovementioned theoretical framework, the following topics of the training course for school teams (10 ECTS) were identified: vision and school culture, legislative framework and school policy, learning environment and resources, professionalism of staff, collaboration, and quality assurance (see also Kivirand et al., 2021 ). The training course was divided into nine sessions with 60 academic hours contact training and 200 h independent or group activities. The aim of the current study is to explore how long-term in-service training for school teams (teachers, support specialists, school leaders) influenced schools’ development activities in the implementation of IE and what factors affected it based on the school teams’ perspective.

The following research questions were set:

1. What development activities were carried out during the in-service training course to implement IE at the schools?

2. What factors affected the development activities planned and carried out in the implementation of IE?

Methodology

An exploratory case study approach was used as it enabled to answer the questions “what” development activities were carried out during the training course to implement IE at the schools and explore “why” or “how” these phenomena appeared in the context these were situated ( Baxter and Jack, 2008 ).

Selection of Cases

Purposeful sampling was used in which data are collected from people who can best inform the researcher about the research problem under the examination ( Creswell, 2007 ). Two participating schools (out of four) were selected as cases for the current study following these criteria (see also Table 1 ):

1. Clear initiative from the school to participate in the training course with the aim to carry out school development activities in the field of IE;

2. Students with and without SEN in the area of their school residence study in school;

3. Schools with similar numbers of students in the level of compulsory education managed by the same municipality;

4. Participation of all school levels’ key stakeholders in implementing inclusive education, i.e., school principal, support specialist in the role of the special needs education coordinator (SENCO) and teachers.

Table 1 . Background data of study participants.

The sampling technique took into consideration that participants’ experiences and actions can provide purposeful information and build an in-depth picture about the case ( Creswell, 2007 ).

At the beginning of the training course, both schools applied for funding to improve the learning environment at the local government. Both schools received funding and these were co-funded by the European Social Funds (ESF).

Ethical Issues

At the beginning of the study, all participants were explained the purpose of the study and what data would be collected, used, and stored. It was also confirmed that the confidentiality of the data is guaranteed and all the data collected on paper or in digital form are kept secure. It was clarified that all data will be used only for research purposes and the results will be presented in a generalized form, following all the requirements of the ethical study which does not allow the participants to be identified. All team members gave written consent to participate in the study.

While conducting group interviews, we took into account that ethical issues may arise related to confidentiality, in particular from the point of view of the interviewees ( Sim and Waterfield, 2019 ). Therefore, good confidentiality practice was explained to the interviewees before the group interviews. More precisely, it was clarified that different personal opinions are expected and accepted, and participants were asked not to discuss shared personal information with others. In addition, the interview questions did not address sensitive personal information.

Data Collection Procedure

As the use of the exploratory case study method presumes to collect data in different ways and analyze them in depth ( Yin, 2003 ), we collected data in the following stages and formats (examples of data collection is presented in Table 2 ):

Table 2 . Examples of data collection.

Group Interviews in the Middle of the Training

After the sixth session, semi-structured school-based group interviews with both school teams separately were conducted by trainers. In choosing the group interviews, we relied on Cohen et al. (2007) explanation that group members who have worked together can support or complement each other. The purpose of the group interviews in the middle of the training course was to get feedback on the content, volume, and organization of the training course to make modifications if necessary and thereby better support schools in their development activities. Interviews were between 1 h and 1 h and 10 min in length.

School Policy Documents

A desktop analysis ( Mason, 2002 ) of available school policy documents on IE was carried out in the beginning and at the end of the training course with the aim to map the preliminary situation and find out the final modifications. This method made it possible to understand how schools’ inclusive education policies have changed and are reflected in formal documents. We analyzed documents that are mandatory for schools by law and must be publicly available.

Team Homework Assignments of Training Course

The homework submitted during the training was purpose-built documents for the study, which provided an additional opportunity to get answers to the research questions: what development activities were carried out during the in-service training course to implement IE at the schools, and what factors affected the development activities planned and carried out in the implementation of IE. According to Gillham (2000) , this method makes it possible to keep track of what the case study participants said and what they actually did .

Group Interviews After the Training Course

As semi-structured interviews are the most important form of interviewing in case study research ( Gillham, 2000 ), we conducted additional group interviews at the end of the training course. The purpose of these interviews was to find out what development activities on IE schools were carried out during the training course and what were the supporting/hindering factors in implementing the changes. The duration of interviews with both schools was 45 min.

Open-Ended Questionnaires After the Training

Individual open-ended questionnaire as an additional method was chosen to complement the group interviews and sought further answers in particular to the second research question. Bryman (2016) and Mason (2002) suggest to use this method as it allows all participants to individually provide their personal opinion and additional information.

Researcher’s Diary

A research diary was kept by the first author of the study during the training course. This method helped to reflect the results of the research in a more open and honest way ( Engin, 2011 ).

Data Analysis

In the current case study, the form of the embedded analysis of different units was used ( Yin, 1994 ). The preliminary situation, process, and final outcomes of schools’ developmental activities and factors affected these activities were analyzed using multiple data collection instruments.

The data analysis procedure consisted of three phases.

Preparation Phase

The aim of the preparation phase was to prepare data for thematic content analysis. Interviews with both school teams were recorded and transcribed in full. Schools’ policy documents, the training course homework, open-ended questionnaires, and research diary notes were documented separately by the schools. The total volume of the data was 110 pages in the first case and 108 pages in the second case.

Case by Case Analysis Phase

In the second phase, a thematic content analysis was conducted separately by cases as it enabled to describe the meaning of qualitative data systematically and rule guided but also in a flexible way ( Schreier, 2012 ). All documented materials were repeatedly read with the aim to select the meaning units by the research questions. Consequently, condensed meaning units were coded, which in turn were listed in a separate file. The list of codes included the name of the code, description, and examples of the meaning units. After the coding process, the codes were grouped under subthemes and main themes. For example, the codes “changing the system of development conversation,” “monitoring individual development of students,” formed a subtheme, supporting students . The codes “mapping teachers’ training needs,” “in-school trainings for teachers,” formed a subtheme, supporting teachers . The codes “renewal curriculum,” “preparation of a development plan,” formed a subtheme, school policy . Finally, three subthemes formed the main theme, structural change. The two cases are described by the main themes and subthemes.

Multiple Case Analysis Phase

In the final phase, a cross-case analysis was conducted using qualitative meta-analysis synthesis to compare and synthesize themes and subthemes, with triangulation of findings across cases to support validity of the study ( Mays and Pope, 2000 ). The focus was on the pattern establishment and generalizations. At the end of this phase, the analysis revealed similarities and differences of the cases and the results are presented by the main themes combined with subthemes. For example, describing what factors affected school development activities, the subthemes development activities led by appointed leader, school leader as a member of the team, teacher as a leader among other teachers formed the main theme “leadership.”

The initial data analysis was done by the first author. Following, all co-authors were involved in the final data analysis process and both coding and categorization decision were discussed until a consensus was reached.

In the following section, we describe the results of the data analysis on a case-by-case basis, which development activities were carried out by the schools and what factors affected it. We also present a comparison of the two cases and discuss the most important results.

Development Activities Carried Out During the Training Course

In the first case, a change of school leader took place 2 years prior to the training course in which the data from this study were collected. The teaching staff in this school had also changed to a large extent. Due to the increasing proportion of students with special educational needs in the school, the school leader had set a priority to improve implementing IE in their school. At the beginning of the training, discussions took place between the parties involved in the school (teachers, parents, students) about the school’s vision and values. As a result, the main principles of IE were jointly agreed and, most importantly, inclusion was considered in a broader sense, i.e., inclusion concerns all learners, not just those with special needs. A joint agreement was made at the school that special classes would not be formed for SEN students, instead IE supported by co-learning with peers in an inclusive classroom. However, if necessary, sufficient support would be organized individually or in groups. The mapping of inclusive school culture conducted during the training course revealed that not all teachers share inclusive values to the same degree and therefore the goal was to keep the development of inclusive school culture in focus among teachers and the wider school community.

To support the relationships between students in the school, a support program for students with learning difficulties and behavioral problems was implemented during the training course. Some students became support peers for other students on a voluntary basis. This was considered important, in particular, to support student-to-student friendships and to provide student-to-student assistance, but also to enhance cooperation between students and teachers. The school also joined an evidence-based anti-bullying program.

In order to support all students and to notice the individual special needs of students at an early stage, the procedure for developmental interviews with students and their parents was arranged. By the end of the training, a thorough procedure and instructions for conducting development interviews for teachers as well as parents and students were completed. The teacher who participated in the training said:

My favorite development activity was the topic of development discussions. This did not happen systematically in our school. Now we have specific guidelines and forms for collecting feedback from students and parents and documenting the developmental interview.

An analysis of the school’s SEN student support system at the beginning of the training course indicated that it is not sufficiently systematic and comprehensible to all parties. Therefore, the school team focused on updating the system for monitoring and intervening in the individual development of students, which resulted in the reorganization of the entire school support system. As a result, the principles and objectives of support were formulated, the support services provided at different levels were described, the roles of the different parties were specified, the principles of cooperation in supporting students, and the criteria for evaluating support results were defined. Under the leadership of support specialists, this was immediately implemented in the school.

In order for the renewed support system to be implemented effectively at the school level, internal training was organized for all teachers. Under the leadership of support specialists, a learning community was initiated for teachers and parents, where it was possible to discuss how to find solutions to the problems that have arisen in the involvement of students with SEN. At the same time, the need for longer-term training for teachers was mapped based on the specifics of meeting their own development needs and development goals. The school also decided to initiate a mentoring program for new teachers, and one part of this was the SEN student support system at school. In order to provide comprehensive support to teachers, support specialists also passed through the training in co-vision techniques.

As the basic document of the school’s operation is the school curriculum, the extent to which the curriculum supports the provision of quality education for children with SEN was analyzed. As a result, the school curriculum was supplemented. Firstly, the members of the school team focused on formulating minimum learning outcomes for students with learning difficulties, and secondly, the further task of the support specialists was to supplement the development of the general competencies described in the curriculum. SENCO of the school explained:

Speech therapists should look at how to achieve communication skills, the task of a social pedagogue is to develop social skills, a special educator should look at the topic of learning skills and a psychologist the topic of emotional skills. And then the school curriculum will frame these important points on how to support students in these areas.

At the end of the training, the school had prepared a new development plan for the next 3 years, which defined the following development areas: systematic and value-based management of the school; supporting the development of inspired, collaborative, satisfied and professional staff; effective cooperation with stakeholders, and creating an inclusive school environment. The participants themselves emphasized:

Since we consider inclusion in our school in a broad sense, all the planned development activities in our development plan are in fact the development activities of an inclusive school.

As can be seen from the above description, during the training course, the school was able to improve the functioning of the inclusive education system as well as to draw up a long-term strategic plan with clear objectives and specific activities.

Factors Affected Development Activities

The team that participated in the training had set a specific goal to reach a development plan by the end of the training course, which also defines further development directions. The school leader appointed a support specialist to lead the development activities of IE, who also performed the tasks of the SENCO at the school. In the case of the teachers selected for the team, the principle considered that they would be motivated to improve themselves in the field of IE and thus, contribute to development activities. The school leader did not take a leading role and was involved as a member of the team, and this was explained as follows:

The fact that I chose a specialist to lead the process was, in my view, the only right decision. With her knowledge and dedication, she was the real leader we were able to rely on.

All team members were committed to addressing all the topics covered during the training. It was emphasized that the involvement of different specialists working in the school in the training course increased both the cooperation between them and the cooperation at the school level as a whole. The possibility of cooperating with other schools was also considered an encouraging factor. However, participants pointed out that the implementation of IE in schools is greatly influenced by how it is supported at the national level. They mentioned a lack of state support in ensuring the availability of necessary support for learners with SEN, such as directing resources to access out-of-school counseling services, developing teacher training, improving learning environments, and creating study materials for different levels of learning.

The implementation of the planned activities was supported by the ESF co-financial support for the improvement of the learning environment and received at the beginning of the training. At the end of the training, the school had an extension of a school building, which solved the lack of space, especially in providing flexible learning opportunities and the necessary support for students with SEN. During the training, after mapping the need for support professionals, the school head found an opportunity to hire more staff of support specialists. The school’s team members were pleased with this situation, but emphasized:

However, in the implementation of the planned development activities, we will continue to see the need to contribute to the improvement of the learning environment as well as to the increase of the existing human resources. But now we face the challenge of how to use them most effectively in a context of limited resources.

The lack of time was emphasized as a critical factor in planning and implementing all activities during the training course, but the team coped well with time planning. Participants acknowledged that in a time-constrained environment, skillful time planning and consistency in adherence to the plan are important. As such, it was possible to meet with the team on a weekly basis, if necessary, conduct brainstorming with the entire staff, and contribute to the homework provided during the training course.

According to the participants’ point of view, they were also supported in planning the development activities of IE by the fact that during the training course it was possible to comprehensively address various aspects of IE and thus create a systematic approach to achieving both short-term and long-term goals. The role of trainers as external experts was considered important. The trainers’ broad knowledge of the meaningful implementation of IE, taking into account evidence-based practice and linking theory to practice, was highlighted as positive. However, participants acknowledged that there was a lack of individual school visits and counseling during the training period. Regarding the recommendations of the specialists of the regional out-of-school counseling team, it was pointed out that their decisions are often inconsistent with the school’s SEN student support system and do not support inclusive classroom practice.

In conclusion, the clearly set short- and long-term goals and SENCO’s committed leadership in promoting the key topics supporting implementation of IE covered in the training course encouraged all members collaboratively contribute to the planned activities. However, there was a need for greater state involvement in the implementation of inclusive education policies and more effective out-of-school counseling services.

In the second case, the school leader had been in office for 8 years and the school team was guided by the vision and core values previously developed in the training activities. The core values reflected in the school’s documentation were openness, cooperation, and creativity. Good education is ensured for each student according to their level of development and ability-based grouping of students. At the beginning of the training, participants explained that the core values of their school reflect the nature of IE. However, during the training, the concept and meaning of IE was discussed and it was decided to set out more clearly the principle of inclusive education, according to which students with SEN generally study in the mainstream classroom and receive the necessary support. However, participants emphasized:

Providing inclusive education principle in documents and the introduction of this idea alone will not help. However, inclusion is encouraged by the continuous promotion of the organization’s culture and spirituality. We need to communicate our values both inside and outside the school.

As the school has a large number of students of different nationalities as well as students with different SEN, an evidence-based behavioral skills development program was introduced at the school to ensure the safety of all students. During the training period, the implementation of this program was extended. In addition, the school’s rules of procedure were amended to make more precise the guidelines for the behavior of all learners, including those with SEN, in different situations. The participants of the training indicated:

Such clear instructions were actually useful for other students as well. Everyone immediately had fewer problems.

In order to ensure the well-being of the teachers, one person was selected from among the teachers to mediate the problems and concerns to the management board.

To improve the necessary support for students, the practical arrangements for early detection of SEN and the availability of support in their school were analyzed and organized in such a way that there is a comprehensive system that supports all those in need. The responsibilities and tasks of the different parties, the principles of providing support, the support services provided, and the criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of IE were specified. By the end of the training, the team had changed the SEN students support procedure document in cooperation with the support specialists and teachers working at the school and made it available on the school’s website.

In order to enhance and support cooperation between teachers, a subject section on IE was launched, where teachers could exchange their experiences and provide the necessary counseling from support professionals or teachers who had participated in the training. In order to plan teachers’ individual subject training needs, as well as the inclusion needs of children with SEN, the school head drew up a matrix of teacher development needs based on school values on the one hand and the professional standard of teachers on the other. Based on this matrix, teachers can analyze their development needs in implementing IE, plan training courses, and thus shape their careers.

The team that participated in the training also analyzed the school curriculum from the point of view of inclusive study organization, and thorough changes were made to this document: the principle of IE was set and the principles of supporting children with special needs and counseling parents were brought into line with the improved system and legislation. However, the participants commented:

Now that we are streamlining our IE system, we are coming up with new ideas and therefore realizing that the curriculum needs to be constantly updated and improved. It will never be finished.

In conclusion, it can be said that during the training, the school team worked to improve the internal support of students with SEN, to organize the documents concerning the organization of IE, and to map further development needs. The aim was that the knowledge and information gathered during the training would be analyzed more thoroughly together with the entire school staff and used as a basis for compiling a new development plan.

The school team had set the goal of improving the organization of support for learners with SEN during the training course and defining the development goals of IE. The school leader gave the initial initiative in planning the development activities of IE to the team participating in the training course. The school leader submitted proposals both in the mapping of the situation and in the planning of activities in the phase when the need for development activities in one or another area had become clear. Once completed, the proposals were submitted by the school leader and justified this as follows:

I made a very conscious choice for my school team. It was important to me that the team included proactive support professionals and teachers from all levels of primary school. I delegated the management of this whole process to them, as they communicate most closely with both teachers and students.

The school team was motivated to deal with the set goals and the cooperation between the team members went well. At the same time, it was pointed out that not all teachers were sufficiently involved in the mapping and planning of the development activities within the school. Participants felt that not enough support was found at the local government level to improve IE. It was explained that the implementation of inclusive education has been largely an initiative of some schools themselves, but local government education officials should take the lead in creating an understanding that all schools in their area need to teach children in an inclusive way and then provide them with the necessary support. The participants of the training also pointed out that the state education policy approach to the implementation of IE also sets certain limits in terms of the planned activities.

On the one hand, the support system for learners with disabilities is too bureaucratic and non-inclusive. On the other hand, the number of new immigrants is constantly increasing. This target group is not well supported.

However, during the training period, the school received financial resources co-financed by ESF to improve the learning environment. It was decided to invest in the furnishing of the classrooms (e.g., adjustable desks, soundproof partitions, etc.). After reorganizing the support system, the number of support specialists in the school was increased. As a result, it was possible to practice the planned activities and provide more effective support to students, teachers, and parents. While at the beginning of the training SENCO’s tasks were divided between the school principal and one school support specialist, at the end of the training SENCO was replaced by a new support specialist, as the upgraded system required more time and one leader.

According to the trainees, the fulfillment of the goals set by the school both in the improvement of the existing system and in the mapping of development needs was also supported by the complex treatment of various key topics related to inclusive education during the training and exchange of experiences with other schools. However, the trainees pointed out that the time resource set its own limits and that it was not possible to contribute enough to all the planned activities. It was also acknowledged that accurate time management and adherence to it would have helped to reduce this problem. The lack of financial resources was also highlighted. The school team would have liked to recruit more teachers and assistant teachers to reduce the workload of teachers who had more students with SEN in their class.

The involvement of external expertise in the form of trainers during the planning and implementation of the school’s development activities was considered important by the school team. In addition, as expressed, co-operation with trainers could even continue after the end of the training course. Specialists from the out-of-school counseling team were expected to provide more guidance on how to organize the teaching of students with more severe special needs, as well as students without special needs, in an inclusive classroom.

In summary, a committed team was working on improving the situation related to IE. A clear leader of the work was not specified. The goals were met, and the team was motivated to improving IE at school. However, a number of obstacles were highlighted, such as a lack of resources and a lack of commitment from local and national authorities to support IE policies at school level. There was also a need to continue consulting with the external experts after the training.

Cross-Case Analyze

Similarities and differences between the two cases in development activities carried out during the in-service training course.

We compared the similarities and differences between the two cases regarding the activities that were carried out during the training and identified different cultural and structural level changes (see Table 3 ).

Table 3 . Similarities and differences between the two cases in development activities on inclusive education (IE).

Shaping School Culture

A comparative analysis of the cases shows that schools dealt differently with the topic of vision and values during the training course. In the first case, the school had decided to start developing targeted IE just before the training course. In cooperation with all parties, the vision and values of the school were set out, including the principle of inclusive education, which became the basis for mapping the current situation and planning further development activities. The focus was to increase the capacity of the whole school to teach students with SEN in an inclusive classroom. In the second case, the vision and values were defined years earlier and their renewing was not discussed. However, the school team decided that the principle of IE and its meaning should be more clearly articulated in the school documentation, as there were no common understandings of the meaning of IE at school level. Designing a school culture for the meaningful implementation of IE remained a challenge for future development.

Evidence-based behavioral programs were used in both cases to develop good practice and ensure safety for all students. Additionally, a peer supporting program was initiated in the first case. In the second case, to ensure the well-being of the teachers, one person was selected from the teachers who was appointed as the coordinator of the well-being of the teachers and whose task was to communicate the problems and concerns of the teachers to the management.

Structural Change

In both cases, the training involved organizing and drafting the school’s key policy documents, although in different ways. In the first case, the priority was to develop a new development plan for the school, and this goal was met. The completed strategic document was clearly communicated, with specific targets and measurable development activities, which reflected the characteristics of an inclusive school and where the creation of high-quality learning opportunities that support the individual development of the student had been identified as the most important development activity. In the second case, the part of the school curriculum dealing with support and counseling for students with SEN was updated. Preparations of a new development plan were also started. It was emphasized that the situation of the self-assessment questionnaires, learning environment, resources and training needs conducted during the training course were mapped and analyzed by the members participating in the training course and provided a lot of valuable information, all of which needs to be discussed with the whole school staff.

In the first case, the procedure of developmental dialogue with students and parents was thoroughly addressed, as it did not work systematically at school. In the second case, it was not considered necessary to make changes to this document. According to the participants’ point of view, the procedure of developmental dialogue was well organized in their school. In both cases, the system for noticing, intervening and documenting the need for support for learners with SEN was streamlined. The school team was recognized at the local government level for this activity in the first case. In the second case, rules of procedure were amended. The amended procedures made the rules of good behavior clearer for students with SEN as well as for other students.

In both cases, in-school training was provided to support teachers. In the first case, the training was conducted by the participants for all teachers in relation to the needs mapped during the training and the revised documents. For example, it became clear that the roles of support professionals and the support system were not clear to all teachers, and in-school training was provided on the subject. In the second case, teacher-to-teacher training was provided. The teachers who took part in the training, who were selected from different school levels, shared the knowledge gained during the training in smaller study circles. In the first case, too, learning communities were initiated for teachers, but in terms of content, they aimed at solving the problems that had arisen. In addition, the school mapped teachers’ training needs, which highlighted the need to increase teachers’ knowledge and skills in three key core values related to inclusive teacher education: valuing learner diversity, supporting all learners in an inclusive classroom, and collaborative skills. As a result of the mapping of the training needs, a long-term teacher training plan was prepared to ensure the fulfillment of the goals set in the development plan. In the second case, the school head drew up a comprehensive self-assessment matrix for teachers’ training needs for IE, based on which teachers themselves mapped their training needs and then draw up an annual training plan.

In conclusion, although both schools contributed to the planning and implementation of development activities in different ways during the training, in both cases their own goals were followed, and they were achieved. In the first case, the training focused intensively on the development of all the topics covered during the training course, and a development plan was completed, setting targets for the next 3 years. In the second case, the main focus was on the mapping of development needs, on the basis of which it was planned to start preparing a new development plan after the end of the training course. However, while considering different activities, it also became visible that both schools focused more on the structural changes and somewhat less on the cultural changes.

Similarities and Differences Between the Two Cases About Factors Affecting School Development Activities on IE

Next, we compared the similarities and differences regarding the factors that the trainees considered important in the planning and implementation of IE development activities (see Table 4 ) and distinguished these across six broader main themes.

Table 4 . Similarities and differences between the two cases factors affecting.

The schools had organized the leadership of development activities differently. In the first case, a specific leader, SENCO, working at the school, was appointed to lead the whole development process. The school leader was an active member of the team and participated in the process of mapping development needs as well as planning improvement activities. In the second case, there was no specific leader in the activities carried out during the training course. Teachers and support professionals who participated in the training course mainly contributed to the improvement of the support system for students with SEN. The school leader took responsibility for ensuring the professionalism of teachers, such as conducting a self-assessment questionnaire among all teachers and mapping teachers’ training needs.

In both cases, it appeared that teachers had become carriers of inclusive thinking and practice and there for also leaders for their colleagues within the school.

Commitment and Contribution

Both schools were motivated to participate in the training course and thus, to enhance IE arrangements so that all students would be supported in an inclusive classroom. In the first case, in addition to immediate actions to improve the efficiency of the support system, a long-term strategic development plan was drawn up during the training. The other team aimed to map out the areas that need to be thoroughly developed, which would support them in drawing up a development plan after the training course.

In both cases, all team members participated in the training activities as well as in the homework assignments. Participants emphasized that taking responsibility was voluntary and that everyone contributed to the activities in which they felt a strong commitment. This was also supported by the fact that at the beginning of the training course both schools had clear goals and objectives, which they want to achieve by the end of the training course. At the same time, in both cases it was stated that the involvement of the whole school staff in the development process still needs to be improved. It was also pointed out that not all teachers have an understanding of the meaning and importance of inclusive education.

At the same time, it was emphasized in both cases that they perceived little contribution from the state to the implementation of inclusive education policies and to the support of schools in the implementation of IE. It was pointed out that there is a lack of a clear vision and goal at the national level on how to make the whole education system more inclusive and gaps in legislation were also observed. In the second case, the lack of commitment of local authorities to promoting inclusive education at regional level was also highlighted.

Collaboration

The cooperation between the members of both teams who participated in the training course went well. It was pointed out that working together during the training strengthened the relationships between the team, which in turn had a positive effect on the cooperation within the school with other teachers who have readiness to teach in an inclusive classroom. At the same time, in both cases, there was a greater need to involve parents and the community in planning development activities. Cooperation with other schools was highly valued as the exchange of different experiences during the training provided lots of ideas on how to solve different problems and what aspects to pay attention to in the school’s development activities.

System-Wide Approach

In both cases, it was considered important that the training addressed the most important issues related to the development activities of an inclusive school in an integrated way. It was pointed out that linking theory to practice helped to create a broad-based background for mapping the real situation and planning development activities.

Both schools found opportunities to improve their school environment and recruit additional staff. However, school No. 2 pointed to a greater need for financial resources to implement its plans. The lack of time was emphasized by both teams. On the one hand, this was due to the fact that the school development process was very time-consuming, and on the other hand, schools were overburdened with activities due to the COVID-19 crisis. However, in the first case, the team was able to plan their time very carefully for both completing homework assignments and development planning. Although, they admitted that it was very burdensome and at times they acted within their capabilities. In the second case, regular meetings were not planned or the planned activities were postponed due to lack of time.

External Expertize

In both cases, it was considered important that an expert from outside the school be involved in planning and developing the development activities of IE, who would be able to point out the mapping of different key areas and their interrelationship. It was pointed out that the in-service training program developed at the university provided a good opportunity for this. The research- and evidence-based approach to supporting school self-development activities was considered very important. Linking theory and practice during the training course was also highlighted as a supporting factor. At the same time, the need for more individual meetings with trainers during the training course was acknowledged. It was also pointed out that cooperation with trainers could continue after the training course. As the closest advisory experts at the school level are specialists from the regional out-of-school counseling team, it was criticized that their advice did not always support schools how to teach students in an inclusive classroom.

In conclusion, participation in the training course as a team, the commitment and specific goals of the team, cooperation with other schools, the complexity and coherence of the topics covered in the training course were seen as supporting factors in schools’ development process. The lack of time and involvement of the parties of the whole school was an obstacle. The low contribution of the state and local government to the issue of inclusive education was seen as an out of school hindering factors. A need for individual counseling was reported by trainers both during and after the training. Regarding the practice of an inclusive classroom, the trainees felt little support from the specialists of the out-of-school counseling centers. On a more general perspective, both schools pointed out more supportive factors and some hindering factors regarding school level factors, while regarding the region and state level concerns and hindering factors were voiced more than the supportive factors.

The aim of the current study was to explore how long-term in-service training for school teams (teachers, support specialists, school leaders) influenced schools’ development activities in the implementation of IE and what factors affected it in school teams’ perspective.

During the training course, schools carried out several short-term development activities according to their school’s needs. The focus was on activities related to shaping school culture, as well as updating policy documents on IE in the school and thus enhancing support for students and teachers. Longer-term goals for further activities were also set. In one case, a school development plan was drawn up for the next 3 years, and in another case it was decided to start working after the training. Thus, the training had a positive effect on the development activities of schools in the field of IE. As school self-development is considered to be one of the most important criteria for removing barriers to the implementation of inclusive education ( Hadfield and Ainscow, 2018 ; Ainscow, 2020 ), in-service training for school teams is a good opportunity to support them in this process. Moreover, restructuring the school policy and practice can improve the learning outcomes of all students ( Persson, 2013 ).

The results of the case study showed that the development activities planned and carried out during the training course depended to a large degree on how the school had understood the concept of IE. If the school understood IE to mean teaching all students together in an inclusive classroom, the mapping of development needs, and planned development activities, also focused on how to increase the capacity of the whole school to put IE into practice. Although the principle of IE has been one of the basic values of education policy in the Estonian context for more than 10 years, the meaning of the concept of IE is still understood very differently ( Kivirand et al., 2020 ) and this was also confirmed by this study. The same trend is highlighted in several studies in other countries ( Hardy and Woodcock, 2015 ; Cameron, 2017 ), and our study indicates again the importance of reaching the agreement regarding the concept of IE in the Estonian context. Moreover, in the Estonian context, the most important features of IE are considered to be social inclusion and high-quality education for all learners ( Ministry of Education and Reseach, 2021 ), i.e., the focus is on creating opportunities for students with SEN to study in mainstream schools. However, it is common practice that students with more severe SEN spend most of their time, either partially or continuously throughout the school year, in a special class or in a smaller group. Schools that use the practices described above identify themselves as inclusive schools. Black-Hawkins and Florian (2021) have also pointed out that schools that contribute to providing support and learning opportunities for SEN students in mainstream schools consider themselves inclusive schools. Therefore, addressing the different characteristics of an inclusive school culture during the in-service training course is important to change what we mean by the concept of IE. However, shaping shared values across the school is a long and complex process. In order for the values and the principles of IE developed by the team to be more widely recognized among the entire school staff, more activities could be planned for further training that would involve the whole school staff in shaping the vision and values. More emphasis should also be placed in initial teacher education on how to put IE into practice in a meaningful way. This, in turn, would provide a good starting point to engaging in a constructive dialogue in society as a whole in order to remove barriers between two somewhat opposing discourses, “inclusion for some” or “inclusion for all,” as Leijen et al. (2021) have highlighted in their study.

The changes planned and carried out during the training in the policy and structure of the school (see Table 3 ) were greatly influenced by the existence of a specific leader. As the school leader in the first case had chosen a specific leader to lead the whole process, they were able to plan time more effectively throughout the process and meet the short-term and long-term goals set. Appointing a support specialist, who is also in the role of SENCO at the school, to lead the change in IE is one way to map systematically all development needs and plan future activities on IE. As SENCO is the most involved with teachers and the school’s support team on a day-to-day basis, she perceives the need to support teachers in teaching SEN students in an inclusive classroom. In this way, it is possible to implement certain innovations immediately and thus also change the role of support professionals in supporting both students and teachers. Also in the international context, the focus is on the changing role of support professionals, especially in supporting teachers and introducing collaborative teaching practices ( Perez et al., 2017 ; Florian, 2019 ). The results of this study revealed that a dedicated and professional leader encouraged and motivated all team members to contribute to all planned development activities. Even more, teachers who participated in the training course became carriers of IE values and communicated about practical solutions for other teachers in the school. According to Mangope and Mukhopadhyay (2015) , cooperation between teachers in turn promotes their professional self-development. The participation and contribution of school leaders throughout the training was also an important positive factor. School leaders saw their role in implementing inclusive education primarily in communicating inclusive philosophy and values both within and outside school, facilitating collaboration between different actors, providing resources to overcome barriers, and creating opportunities for teachers’ professional development. The role of the school leader in shaping an inclusive organization has also been emphasized in several studies ( Harris and Jones, 2017 ; Murphy, 2018 ; Lambrecht et al., 2020 ). Khaleel et al. (2021) have also found that the role of the school leader is largely divided into two groups: creating an appropriate environment for internal school-based activities, and creating a social, academic, and emotional atmosphere; and out-of-school activities such as communication with parents and regional policy makers. Thus, the participation of school principals in in-service training, which deals with the planning of cultural and structural changes throughout the organization, is very important for their realization.

The study showed that the participation of different school teams in the in-service training course was also a positive factor. Sharing experiences with other schools made it possible to learn from each other and thus enhanced the school’s development activities in the context of their own school and enabled to create a basis for further collaborative activities. The effectiveness of inter-school collaboration in the process of development activities in IE has also been proved in several other studies (see Ainscow et al., 2006 ; Ainscow, 2015 ). Thus, more collaborative inter-school learning communities should be created at the local level to enhance the development of meaningfully inclusive schools through the process of self-development activities. Moreover, as members of the school team who participated in the training course saw out-of-school factors as the main hindering factors affecting the implementation of IE, such as the lack of commitment and contribution from the state and local government, more opportunities should be found for wider cooperation. The creation of regional learning communities, involving representatives of the state, local government, schools, and universities, would help to develop shared understandings of the meaning of the concept of IE and to create different models for putting it into practice in the context of their own country. Good examples of this can be found in long-term studies in the UK (see Ainscow et al., 2020 ). This would also make it possible to better understand the role of the state and local government in a meaningful implementation of IE. This does not mean only more financial support, but it is essential to establish proven practices based on research in the context of a particular country. It would also help to approach the development of IE both at the organizational level and in the education system, as Kinsella, 2020 has emphasized in his study. Therefore, even when planning further training, it could be considered whether and how representatives of the state and local governments could be involved at some stage in the training course, in order to initiate a dialogue between the various parties and thus support the schools more effectively.

In conclusion, the participation of different school-level key professionals in long-term in-service training creates a good and broad-based opportunity for school self-development activities in the field of IE. At the same time, it is important that schools are supported at national and local level in this journey.

The results of this study showed that long-term in-service training course for school teams (teachers, support professionals, school leaders) supported schools in planning and implementing IE development activities. In terms of development activities, two main themes were distinguished: activities related to shaping school culture and structural change. Regarding inclusive school culture, the main focus was on developing a vision and value for a meaningful implementation of the concept of IE. However, more activities took place in the context of structural change, such as reforming school policies, renewing the student support system and support for the professional development of teachers. Among the supporting factors within the school, the clearly set goals to be achieved, the commitment of the team that participated in the training course, the contribution of all participants, and good co-operation between them came up. The lack of time for cooperation within the school and the involvement of all school staff in the planning of development activities turned out to be the most essential hindering factors within the school. The out-of-school supporting factors were considered by the trainees to be a system-wide approach to all topics, the integration of theory and practice during the training course, and cooperation with other schools. The main out-of-school hindering factors were the commitment and contribution of the state and local government to the development of an IE system and the lack of evidence-based research in the field of IE in the context of their own country.

Although the study provided a good overview of the effects of team training in the planning and implementation of school self-development activities in the field of IE, we would also like to point out some limitations. Firstly, due to the COVID-19 emergency, we had to hold half of the sessions via Zoom and it was not possible to organize individual school counseling sessions in schools, which would have made it possible to increase the effectiveness of training in the school as a whole. Secondly, school observation as additional data collection method would have provided better information to triangulate the analysis of results, but this was also not possible in the COVID-19 situation. Further research is needed to examine longitudinally how the innovative activities implemented in the in-service training course for school teams influence the social and emotional well-being and academic achievement of all students (SEN and non-SEN students) and satisfaction of parents.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author Contributions

TK contributed to all elements of the research, design and conducted an in-service training course, collected and analyzed the data, described the results, and compiled a discussion. ÄL and LL contributed to the research design, final data analysis process, and editing and reviewing the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

This research was funded by EEA Financial Mechanism 2014–2021, Higher Education in Baltic Research Program, Project Contract No 36.1-3.4/289.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Ainscow, M. (2015). Towards Self-Improving School Systems: Lessons From a City Challenge. London and New York: Routledge Publishing.

Google Scholar

Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy 6, 7–16. doi: 10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: Lessons from international experiences. Nord. Stud. Educ. 6, 7–16. doi: 10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587

Ainscow, M., and Miles, S. (2008). Making education for all inclusive: where next? Prospects 38, 15–34. doi: 10.1007/s11125-008-9055-0

Ainscow, M., Muijs, D., and West, M. (2006). Collaboration as a strategy for improving schools in challenging circumstances. Improv. Sch. 9, 192–202. doi: 10.1177/1365480206069014

Ainscow, M., and Sandill, A. (2010). Developing inclusive education systems: the role of organisational cultures and leadership. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 14, 401–416. doi: 10.1080/13603110802504903

Al-Mahdy, Y. F. H., and Emam, M. M. (2017). Much ado about something’ how school leaders affect attitudes towards inclusive education: The case of Oman. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 22, 1154–1172.

Amin, N. B. M., and Yasin, M. B. M. (2018). The role of instructional leadership in implementation of inclusive educational programs for special needs students. Int. J. Educ. Hum. Soc. Sci. 5, 10–12.

Arcidiacono, F., and Baucal, A. (2020). Towards teacher professionalization for inclusive education: reflection from the perspective of the socio-cultural approach. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian J. Edu. 8, 26–47. doi: 10.12697/eha.2020.8.1.02a

Baxter, P., and Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. Qual. Rep. 13, 544–559. doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573

Bayrakci, M., Titrek, O., and Nguluma, H. (2017). School administrators’ attitudes toward inclusion of children with disabilities in the general education classrooms. Int. J. Lifelong Educ. Leadersh. 3, 1–12.

Bjørnsrud, H., and Nilsen, S. (2019). Joint reflection on action: A prerequisite for inclusive education? A qualitative study in one local primary/lower secondary School in Norway. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 23, 158–173. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2018.1427153

Black-Hawkins, K., and Florian, L. (2021). Classroom teachers’ craft knowledge of their inclusive practice. Teach. Teach. 18, 567–584. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2012.709732

Booth, T., and Ainscow, M. (2002). Index for Inclusion: Developing Learning and Participation in Schools. Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education, United Kingdom.

Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. 5th Edn . United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

Cameron, D. L. (2017). Teacher preparation for inclusion in Norway: a study of beliefs, skills, and intended practices. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 21, 1028–1044. doi: 10.1080/13601116.2017.1326177

Carter, S., and Abawi, L.-A. (2018). Leadership, inclusion, and quality education for all. Australas. J. Spec. Educ. 42, 49–64. doi: 10.1017/jsi.2018.5

Cherkowski, S., and Ragoonaden, K. (2016). Leadership for diversity: Intercultural communication competence as professional development. Teacher Learning and Professional Development 1, 33–43.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education. 6th Edn . London & New York: Routledge.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. 2nd Edn . Sage Publications, Inc.

Engelbrecht, P., Savolainen, H., Nel, M., and Okkolin, M.-A. (2017). Making meaning of inclusive education: classroom practices in finnish and south African classrooms. Compare 47, 684–702. doi: 10.1080/03057925.2016.1266927

Engin, M. (2011). Research diary: a tool for scaffolding. Int. J. Qual. Methods 10, 296–306. doi: 10.1177/160940691101000308

European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2017). “Raising the achievement of all learners: A resource to support self-review,” in European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. eds. V. J. Donnelly and A. Kefallinou (Denmark: Odense).

European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2019). “Inclusive school leadership,” in Exploring Policies Across Europe. European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. eds. E. Óskarsdóttir, V. Donnelly, and M. Turner-Cmuchal (Denmark: Odense).

Florian, L. (2019). On the necessary co-existence of special and inclusive education. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 27, 691–704. doi: 10.1080/1360311.2019.1622801

Forlin, C., and Sin, K.-F. (2017). “In-service teacher training for inclusion,” in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. ed. G. W. Noblit (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Gillham, B. (2000). Case Study Research Methods. Continuum, London.

Grima-Farrell, C., and Mcdonagh, S. (2011). Bridging the research-to-practice gap: a review of the literature focusing on inclusive education. Australas. J. Spec. Educ. 35, 117–136. doi: 10.1375/asje.35.2.117

Hadfield, M., and Ainscow, M. (2018). Inside a self-improving school system: collaboration, competition and transition. J. Educ. Chang. 19, 441–462. doi: 10.1007/s10833-018-9330-7

Hansen, J. H., Carrington, S., Jensen, C. R., Molbaek, M., and Secher Schmidt, M. C. (2020). The collaborative practice of inclusion and exclusion. Nord. Stud. Educ. 6, 47–57. doi: 10.1080/20020317.2020.1730112

Hardy, I., and Woodcock, S. (2015). Inclusive education policies: discourses of difference, diversity and deficit. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 19, 141–164. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2014.908965

Harris, A., and Jones, M. (2017). Leading professional learning with impact. Sch. Leadersh. Manag. 39, 1–4. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2018.1530892

Haug, P. (2020). “It is impossible to avoid policy” comment on Mel Ainscow: Promoting inclusion and equity in education: Lessons from international experiences. Nord. Stud. Educ. 6, 17–20. doi: 10.1080/20020317.2020.1730092

Juma, S., Lehtomäki, E., and Naukkarinen, A. (2017). Developing inclusive pre-service and in-service teacher education: Insights from Zanzibar primary school teachers. Int. J. Whole Sch. 13, 67–87.

Kaur, A., Noman, M., and Awang-Hashim, R. (2015). Exploring strategies of teaching and classroom practices in response to challenges of inclusion in a Thai school: a case study. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 20, 474–485. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2015.1090489

Khaleel, N., Alhosani, M., and Duyar, I. (2021). The role of school principals in promoting inclusive schools: a teachers’ perspective. Front. Educ. 6:603241. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.603241

Kinsella, W. (2020). Organising inclusive schools. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 24, 1340–1356. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2018.1516820

Kivirand, T., Leijen, Ä., Lepp, L., and Malva, L. (2020). Kaasava hariduse tähendus ja tõhusa rakendamise tegurid Eesti kontekstis: õpetajaid koolitavate või nõustavate spetsialistide vaade [The meaning of inclusive education and factors for effective implementation in the Estonian context: A view of specialists who train or advise teachers]. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian J. Educ. 8, 48–71. doi: 10.12697/eha.2020.8.1.03

Kivirand, T., Leijen, Ä., Lepp, L., and Tammemäe, T. (2021). Designing and implementing an in-service training course for school teams on inclusive education: Reflections from participants. Educ. Sci. 11:166. doi: 10.3390/educsci11040166

Lambrecht, J., Lenkeit, J., Hartmann, A., Ehlert, A., Knigge, M., and Spörer, N. (2020). The effect of school leadership on implementing inclusive education: how transformational and instructional leadership practices affect individualised education planning. Int. J. Incl. Educ. Published online. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2010.1752825

Leijen, Ä., Arcidiacono, F., and Baucal, A. (2021). The Dilemma of inclusive education: Inclusion for some or inclusion for all. Front. Psychol. 12:633066. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.6333066

Loreman, T. (2014). Measuring inclusive education outcomes in Alberta, Canada. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 18, 459–483. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2013.788223

Mangope, P., and Mukhopadhyay, S. (2015). Preparing teachers for inclusive education in Botswana: the role of professional development. J. Int. Spec. Educ. 18, 60–72. doi: 10.9782/2159-4341-18.2.60

Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching , (2nd ed). London: SAGE

Mays, N., and Pope, C. (2000). Qualitative research in health care: assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ 320, 50–52. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ministry of Education and Reseach (2021). Hariduslike erivajadustega õpilaste toetamine: õppekorraldus ja tugiteenused. Available at: https://www.hm.ee/et/hariduslike-erivajadusega-opilaste-toetamine (Accessed November 29, 2021).

Mitchell, D. (2015). Inclusive education is a multifaceted concept. CEP J. 5, 9–30. doi: 10.26529/cepsj.151

Murphy, C. D. R. (2018). Educational leaders and inclusive special education: Perceptions, roles, and responsibilities. J. Educ. Cult. Soc. 2. doi: 10.22158/jecs.v2n4p248

OECD (2003). Education Policy Analysis. Paris: OECD Publishing.

OECD (2020). TALIS 2018 Results: Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals. Vol. 2 Paris: OECD Publishing.

Pedaste, M., Leijen, Ä., Kivirand, T., Nelis, P., and Malva, L. (2021). School leaders’ vision is the strongest predictor of their attitudes towards inclusive education practice. Int. J. Incl. Educ. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2021.1994661

Perez, J. S., Llanos, M. N., and Guasp, J. J. M. (2017). Inclusive practices: the role of the support teacher. Aula Abierta 46, 49–56. doi: 10.17811/rifie.46.2.2017.49-55

Persson, E. (2013). Raising achievement through inclusion. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 17, 1205–1220. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2012.745626

Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. SAGE.

Schuelka, M. J., and Engsig, T. T. (2020). On the question of educational purpose: complex educational systems analysis for inclusion. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 26, 448–465. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2019.1698062

Schuelka, M., Sherab, K., and Nidup, T. Y. (2018). Gross National Happiness, British values, and non-cognitive skills: the role and perspective of teachers in Bhutan and England. Educ. Rev. 71, 748–766. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2018.1474175

Sim, J., and Waterfield, J. (2019). Focus group methodology: some ethical challenges. Qual. Quant. 53, 3003–3022. doi: 10.1007/s11135-019-00914-5

Skoglund, P., and Stäcker, H. (2016). How can education systems support all learners? Tipping-point leadership focused on cultural change and inclusive capability. Int. Perspect. Incl. Educ. 8, 111–136. doi: 10.1108/S1479-363620160000008008

United Nations (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (CRPD). Available at: https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/convtexte.htm

Urton, K., Wilbert, J., and Hennemann, T. (2014). Attitudes towards inclusion and self-efficacy of principals and teachers. J. Learn. Disabil. 12, 151–168.

Van Mieghem, A., Verschuren, K., Petry, K., and Stuyf, E. (2018). An analysis of research on inclusive education: a systematic search and metareview. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 24, 675–689. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2018.1482012

Vyas, P., Young, R., Spencer, N., and Sice, P. (2014). “Can awareness-based practices benefit co-creation for social innovation?” in Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings. Vol . 99, 247–258.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods , (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research–Design and Methods, Applied Social Research Methods Series. 3rd Edn . Vol. 5. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Keywords: inclusive education, in-service training, school teams, schools’ development process, factors affecting

Citation: Kivirand T, Leijen Ä and Lepp L (2022) Enhancing Schools’ Development Activities on Inclusive Education Through In-service Training Course for School Teams: A Case Study. Front. Psychol . 13:824620. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.824620

Received: 29 November 2021; Accepted: 29 April 2022; Published: 27 May 2022.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Kivirand, Leijen and Lepp. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Tiina Kivirand, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Inside an Inclusive Classroom: How Two Teachers Work Together

• Share article

From their classroom at P.S. 15 in the Brooklyn section of New York City, kindergarten teachers Catherine Lipkin and Sherri Poall work with students of all abilities as part of a pilot program for co-teaching students with intellectual and multiple disabilities in the same space as their neurotypical peers.

The result is an inclusive classroom where neurotypical students learn empathy for kids with different abilities and come to understand and appreciate those differences. For the students with disabilities who would typically be scattered across the school system away from their neurotypical peers, it’s a chance to work and learn together.

While their school is the only one of its kind within the city school system, Lipkin and Poall hope to see the program expand as a model for inclusive education that can benefit all it touches.

New national data on the teaching profession, vivid reporting from classrooms, and resources to help support this essential profession. Explore the Exclusive Report .

Before You Go...

Sign up for edweek update, edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Elektrostal Hotel

View prices for your travel dates

• Excellent 6
• Very Good 11
• All languages ( 25 )
• Russian ( 25 )
• English ( 0 )

Own or manage this property? Claim your listing for free to respond to reviews, update your profile and much more.

ELEKTROSTAL HOTEL - Reviews (Russia)

Apart Hotel Yantar

View prices for your travel dates

Reviews we perform checks on reviews. tripadvisor’s approach to reviews before posting, each tripadvisor review goes through an automated tracking system, which collects information, answering the following questions: how, what, where and when. if the system detects something that potentially contradicts our community guidelines , the review is not published. when the system detects a problem, a review may be automatically rejected, sent to the reviewer for validation, or manually reviewed by our team of content specialists, who work 24/7 to maintain the quality of the reviews on our site. our team checks each review posted on the site disputed by our community as not meeting our community guidelines . learn more about our review moderation..

• Excellent 0
• Very Good 0
• English ( 0 )

Own or manage this property? Claim your listing for free to respond to reviews, update your profile and much more.

APART HOTEL YANTAR - Reviews, Photos (Elektrostal, Russia)