While inclusive education is not only about inclusive schools (Ainscow et al. 2006) and goes “beyond the school gate” (Ainscow et al. 2012), developing inclusive schools has been, currently is and probably will be one major challenge within different national context throughout Europe and worldwide. Following the UN Conventions on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities many countries are now encouraged to establish inclusive education systems. This paper focuses on the national context of Germany which in contrast to other countries has a long and strong tradition of segregated schooling in special schools. Especially on secondary level, the idea of creating a school for all stands in contrast to a selective secondary education which places students into different schools types based on ability grouping (Werning et al. 2008). In this context, there are barriers to develop quality inclusive education with regard to “access (or presence) of all students” (Artiles et al. 2006, 67) in mainstream schooling. At the same time, as for instance Artiles et al. (2006, 67) emphasized, inclusive education refers to a “transformation of school cultures” not only to increase access and presence, but also acceptance, participation and achievement of all students.

The paper is based on understanding of inclusive education which goes beyond the question of placement of children regarded as disabled or having special educational needs. Inclusive education and hence developing inclusive schools refers to the “neverending process” (Ainscow et al. 2006, 23) of trying to minimize exclusion and discrimination, while maximizing participation on different levels (ibid; Heinrich et al. 2013). However, inclusive education as a slippery concept is defined quite differently in different context or by different people (Ainscow et al. 2006, Dyson 2010). Hence, with regard to the national context of Germany inclusive education, an understanding of inclusive education which mainly refers to the placement of students with special needs within mainstream settings remains relevant (Heinrich et al. 2013).

Previous research showed that teachers and schools deal differently with processes of becoming more inclusive (Artiles et al. 2011). For instance, with regard to the national context of Germany, a recent study (Amrhein 2011) indicated the resistance of some general education teachers to teach in integrated or inclusive classrooms on secondary level. While within the current discussion inclusive schooling is sometimes linked to an improvement in educational quality (Platte 2004), it needs to be emphasized that increasing the heterogeneity within classrooms does not automatically leads to an improved educational quality for all students. On the contrary, new criteria and quality standards are needed (Werning/Löser 2010). However, there is no consensus on the definition of quality standards even within the discourse of inclusive education (Ainscow et al. 2006).

In the German context, the term educational quality appears ubiquitous in the discussion following the PISA results in 2001. Similar to developments in other countries, discussions of as well as measurement of educational quality appeared to be output-orientated (Klieme & Tippelt 2008). As Ainscow et al. (2006) emphasised, principles of inclusive education stand in contrast to the standards agenda. At the same time, both agendas also appear to remain intertwined within inclusive schools (Dyson 2010).

Against this backdrop this paper presents results on general education teachers, special educational teachers, school leaders as well as parents’ views on quality standards and school development within different school contexts. In this context, the following research questions are relevant: How do special education teachers, general education teachers, school leaders and parents define quality standards in inclusive schools? Which are essential criteria from their point of view? How do they reflect on school development? Which are the decisive factors from their perspective?

Amrhein, B. (2011). Inklusion in der Sekundarstufe. Eine empirische Analyse. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. Ainscow, M./ Dyson, A./ Goldrick, S./est, M. (2012). Making schools effective for all: rethinking the task. School Leadership & Management, 32(3), 197–213. Ainscow, M./T. Booth/Dyson, A. (2006). Improving Schools, Developing Inclusion. London: Routledge. Artiles, A. J. (1998). The Dilemma of Difference: Enriching the Disproportionality Discourse with Theory and Context. The Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 32–36. Artiles, A. J./ Kozleski, E. B./ Dorn, S./ Christensen, C. (2006). Chapter 3: Learning in Inclusive Education Research: Re-mediating Theory and Methods With a Transformative Agenda. Review of Research in Education 30, 65-108 Artiles, A.J./ Kozleski, E. B./ Waitoller, F. R. (Ed.) (2011). Inclusive Education. Examining Equity on Five Continents. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press Dyson, A (2010). Die Entwicklung inklusiver Schulen. Drei Perspektiven aus England. [Developing inclusive schools:three perspectives from England] Die deutsche Schule 102, 115-126. Dyson, A./ Howes, A./ Roberts, B. (2002). What do we really know about inclusive schools? A systematic review of the research evidence. In D. R.Mitchell (Ed.), Special Educational Needs and Inclusive Education: Major Themes in Education. (pp. 280-294) London: Routledge. Heinrich, M./ Urban, M. /Werning, R. (2013). Grundlagen, Handlungsstrategien und Forschungsperspektiven für die Ausbildung und Professionalisierung von Fachkräften für inklusive Schulen. In H. Döbert/ Weishaupt, H. (Ed.), Inklusive Bildung professionell gestalten. Situationsanalyse und Handlungsempfehlungen (pp. 69–133). Münster: Waxmann. Klieme, E. & Tippelt, R. (2008). Qualitätssicherung im Bildungswesen: Eine aktuelle Zwischenbilanz. In E. Klieme & R. Tippelt (Ed.), Qualitätssicherung im Bildungswesen. Eine aktuelle Zwischenbilanz (pp 7–13). Weinheim: Beltz. Platte, A. (2004). Inklusive Bildungsprozesse als didaktischer Qualitätssprung?! In E. Feyerer (Ed.), Qual-I-tät und Integration. (pp. 187–195). Linz: Trauner. Shippen, M. et al. (2011). Classroom Structure and Teacher Efficacy in Serving Students with Disabilities: Differences in Elementary and Secondary Teachers. International Journal of Special Education 26 (3), 36-44. Strauss, A. L./ Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage. Werning, R./ Löser, J.M. (2010). Inklusion: Aktuelle Diskussionslinien, Widersprüche und Perspektiven. [Inclusion: actual discussions, contradictions, perspectives] Die Deutsche Schule, 102, 2, 103-114. Werning, R./ Löser, J.M./ Urban, M. (2008). Cultural and Social Diversity: An Analysis of Minority Groups in German Schools. The Journal of Special Education. 42, 47-54.