Developing inclusive education remains one current challenge for educational systems and can be considered as one central topic of debates on reforming education in the European and international context. Inclusive education refers to both, a global concept and discourse as well as the concrete structures and practices on national and local level (Artiles/Dyson 2005). Inclusion “as a general principle” (Clark et al. 1999, 193) might be associated with quite clear pictures of an inclusive school and an impetus for change. However, “the attempted realisation of inclusive in practice” is situated in the complex and contradictory context of “schools as organisations” (ibid.). In contrast to being offered as “a call for radical change to the fabric of schooling” in the beginning, Graham and Slee (2006, 2) criticise that inclusive education is “increasingly … being used as a means for explaining and protecting the status quo.” Furthermore, even if linked to a call for change, “its means of transformation are the established structures, relationships and practices” (Rix 2015, 71). In this respect, while questions of reforming education and change are, of course, linked to broader perspectives on policies and educational system, it seems worthwhile to focus also on the day-to-day practices in the context of inclusive school development.

Although there are limits concerning “within-school approaches” (Ainscow et al. 2012, 136), staff collaboration and creating “conditions that encourage collaboration” (ibid., 21) are considered as important for developing inclusive schools. While collaboration refers to various professional groups (e.g. Easen et al. 2000), collaboration between general and special education teachers, “co-teaching and the shifting roles of special education and regular teachers” (De Vroey et al. 2015, 123), are emphasised by previous research. Co-teaching is often associated with change and transformation: “Ultimately, co-teaching stands as a metaphor for the profound transition currently occurring in education, that is, the blurring of traditional boundaries that separated students” (Friend et al. 2010, 23). However, previous research also highlighted several challenges, some being linked to maintenance of the status-quo like the prevalence of “one teach, one assist” (Scruggs et al. 2007) or a curriculum-planning which appears to be more separated (De Vroey et al. 2015). The latter result refers not only to co-teaching in the classroom, but also raises questions concerning the structures and practices of collaboration outside the classroom. In this respect, lack of common planning time appears to be one major challenge (Scruggs et al. 2007). Nevertheless, collaboration outside the classroom influences collaborative approaches during the lesson (Gurgur/Uzuner 2011; Arndt/Werning 2013). Having adequate time to collaborate outside the classroom, appears to positively influence teachers’ professional development (Rytivaara/Kershner 2012) and is regarded as an opportunity for questioning the “taken for granted assumptions” (Ainscow et al. 2010, 9). Thus, it seems highly relevant to gain a further understanding of collaboration between special and general education teachers outside the classroom, like in team meetings.

Against this backdrop, this paper presents results of an ongoing dissertation project on collaboration between general and special education teachers (thesis supervisor: Rolf Werning). The dissertation project tries to contribute to a deeper understanding of collaboration between general and special education teachers in the context of developing inclusive schools, considering collaboration within team-meetings in particular. The study refers to the national context of Germany. In contrast to a longer tradition of co-teaching in other countries (e.g. Friend et al. 2010), there has been less emphasis on this in the German context with its strong tradition of separated schooling. However, as developing inclusive schools gained more attention following the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, there has been more emphasis on this topic recently.

Ainscow, M./ Dyson, A./Goldrick, S./West, M. (2012). Developing equitable education systems. New York. Ainscow, M./Howes, A./Farrel, P./Frankham, J. (2010). Making Sense of the Development of Inclusive Practices, in: Hick, P./Thomas, G. (Hrsg.): Inclusion and Diversity. Vol. 3. Reprint, Los Angeles, 1–18. Arndt,A./ Werning,R. (2013). Unterrichtsbezogene Kooperation von Regelschullehrkräften und Lehrkräften für Sonderpädagogik. In Werning,R./Arndt,A. (Eds.), Inklusion: Kooperation und Unterricht entwickeln. Bad Heilbrunn, 12-40. Artiles,A./Dyson,A. (2005). Inclusive education in the globalization age. In Mitchell, D. (Ed.), Contextualizing Inclusive Education. Oxfordshire, 37-62. Clarke, A. E. (2009). Situational analysis. Thousand Oaks, Calif. Clark, C., Dyson, A., Millward, A., & Robson, S. (1999). Theories of Inclusion, Theories of Schools: deconstructing and reconstructing the ‘inclusive school‘. British Educational Research Journal, 25(2), 157–177. Conderman, G. (2011). Methods for Addressing Conflict in Cotaught Classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic 46, 221–229. De Vroey/A., Struyf, E./Petry, K. (2015). Secondary schools included: a literature review. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–27. Easen, P./Atkins, M./Dyson, A. (2000). Inter-professional Collaboration and Conceptualisations of Practice.Children & Society 14, 355–367. Flick,U. (1997). The episodic interview. http://www2.lse.ac.uk/methodology/pdf/QualPapers/Flick-episodic.pdf. Friend, M./Cook, L./Hurley-Chamberlain, D./Shamberger, C. (2010). Co-Teaching: An Illustration of the Complexity of Collaboration in Special Education. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20 (1), 9–27. Graham, L. J./Slee, R.(2006), Inclusion?. In Proceedings Disability Studies in Education Special Interest Group, American Educational Research Association (AERA) 2006 Annual Conference, San –Francisco. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/10875327.pdf. Gurgur,H./Uzuner,Y. (2011). Examining the implementation of two co-teaching models: team teaching and station teaching. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 589-61. Kelchtermans,G. (2006). Teacher collaboration and collegiality as workplace conditions. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 220-237. Naraian, S. (2010). General, special and … inclusive: Refiguring professional identities in a collaboratively taught classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26 (8), 1677–1686. Rapley,T. (2007). Doing conversation, discourse and document analysis. Los Angeles. Richards, K. (2006). Language and professional identity: Aspects of collaborative interaction. Palgrave studies in professional and organizational discourse. Basingstoke. Rix, J. (2015). Must Inclusion be Special?: Rethinking Educational Support Within a Community of Provision. London. Rytivaara, A./Kershner, R. (2012). Co-teaching as a context for teachers' professional learning and joint knowledge construction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(7), 999–1008. Scruggs, T. E./Mastropieri, M. A./McDuffie, K. A. (2007). Co-Teaching in Inclusive Classrooms: A Metasynthesis of Qualitative Research. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392–415.