This study is a cross-cultural doctoral research which examines the experiences of students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEN/D) in English and Greek secondary schools. It particularly aims to understand the multi-layered experiences of students by drawing upon their in-depth personal accounts and capturing their own voices.

The main question that drives the research is: ‘How do students with SEN/D experience secondary schools in England and Greece?’

The study values student voice as a main component of achieving inclusion and equity in education (UNESCO, 2017) and recognises its contribution to the improvement of school experiences (Rudduck, 2007). Although inclusion concerns the participation of all students (Ainscow, 2007), student voice has been neglected in research on inclusive education (Wood, 2003). This study focuses particularly on the perspectives of students from the secondary education level, where the challenges faced in including students with SEN/D are greater, and therefore more research is needed (Meijer, 2010).

This study has a cross-cultural dimension by studying students’ voices in two European countries, England and Greece. Although both countries have legislation firmly in place to promote the inclusion of students with SEN/D, inclusion has another history in each country and is managed very differently at school level. England has been chosen for this study because of its long history and international reputation for inclusive research and practice. The UK government has been committed to the principle of inclusion (Dyson, 2005) and student voice is prominent in national policy (DfES, 2014). However, debates and tensions from policy impacting on school practice and student experience still exist (Squires et al., 2016). Greece has been selected as an example of a country that faces many constraints in promoting inclusion, despite the introduction of inclusive practices in secondary schools (EADSNE, 2004). There is also a lack of research on inclusive practice from students’ perspectives in Greek secondary schools (Vlachou and Papananou, 2015).

Researchers in the field of inclusive education internationally have stressed the need for more qualitative data from cross-cultural studies in order to better understand students’ experiences with a view to improving educational systems (D’Alessio & Watkins, 2009; Thomas, 2013). In this study, the cross-cultural approach has been adopted in order to contribute to this knowledge gap on students’ secondary experiences in both countries and to enable knowledge transfer.

To examine systematically the individual and contextual factors that affect the student experiences, the study used Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological theory (Bronfenbrenner, 2005) as an analytical framework. This theory has proven particularly useful in considering the different systemic levels that might impinge upon student experiences (Squires et al., 2016). The Person-Process-Context-Time model (Bronfenbrenner, 2005) was specifically used to provide evidence of how the processes within secondary schools, as well as the diverse socioeconomic, political and cultural contexts shape the student experiences in the two countries. 

The study utilised a multiple-case study design (Yin, 2009). Two secondary schools in each context were recruited, from which 12 secondary students with SEN/D were selected as participants (6 students from the UK and 6 from Greece). Data from interviews with 9 specialist school staff (special educators/teaching assistants) were also gathered for triangulation purposes. The study’s methods included document analysis, classroom observations, interviews combined with participatory methods for eliciting student voice and the systematic use of a research diary. The fieldwork in each school started by observing each student during one school day; the student was then asked to give a ‘guided tour’ and to take photographs of the school; subsequently, an in-depth discussion with each student took place in two separate individual interviews. Throughout the data collection, analytic accounts were documented in the research diary, illustrating initial interpretations, assumptions, ethical considerations and negotiations around the researchers’ role. This reflexive engagement has prompted valuable insights to inform a variety of methodological decisions (Naveed et al., 2017). Almost all interviews were initially analysed during data collection, in order to guide the course of further interviews. Data collected from the observations, the learning walks and the research diary were also used as a guideline to inform further data collection. The main data analysis process included the thematic analysis of the interview data (Braun and Clarke, 2006). The data were transcribed and coded into categories, according to Bronfenbrenner’s theoretical framework. In the first stage of the analysis, twelve ‘personal experience’ stories (one for each student) were developed, by selecting the data segments from the transcriptions which illuminated each participant’s portrait. These data were examined for common themes and ideas, following the concepts within the study’s theoretical framework. In the second stage, a more detailed analysis of the ‘Person’ element of the PPCT model followed, by identifying the main individual student characteristics that affect their experiences. For the analysis of the ‘Process’ element, the students’ interactions with the environment over time (‘proximal processes’) were examined. Subsequently, the analysis of the ‘context’ element of the PPCT model resulted in identifying the most important contextual elements of each school and producing the ecological models for each context. After studying both countries separately, the two ecological models were put into a comparative framework. This process led to the development of cross-case conclusions about the perceived experiences of the students in both countries.

The data analysis facilitated a better understanding of the student experiences in the two diverse contexts. Findings indicate that the students’ type of SEN/D, as well as other student individual characteristics, such as their temperament, constituted important factors which affected considerably their experiences in both contexts. It was also found that certain aspects of secondary school life (i.e. flexibility of specialised support, smooth transition experiences from primary school), were perceived positively by students in both contexts. Other secondary school aspects, such as the continuous exams and grades, were affecting negatively student experiences regardless of the particular school or national context. Nevertheless, unique systemic factors were found to differentiate the student experiences in the two systems. Contextual and cultural issues on several system levels (such as the Ofsted inspections in the UK and the economic crisis in Greece, the openness about SEN/D) were identified to have an effect on the way the students were conceptualising their experiences. Finally, it also emerged that whilst such contextual issues related to policy and wider culture might shape student experiences up to an extent, it was primarily the students’ continuing personal interpretations in dynamic interaction with key people in their school which determined the quality of their secondary experiences. The study’s findings highlight the need for education practitioners to listen more to their students’ with SEN/D and give them more choices in decisions that affect their life in schools. The findings also stress the need for policy to become more student-centered in European secondary schools, by acknowledging students’ rights of participation and inclusion and promoting further student agency. Overall, this study enriches student voice research in the secondary education level and highlights the importance of active listening to the voice of students in order to better understand their experiences.

Ainscow, M., 2007. From special education to effective schools for all: a review of progress so far. The Sage handbook of special education, 146-159. Braun, V., and Clarke, V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Bronfenbrenner, U. 2005. The Bioecological Theory of Human Development. In U. Bronfenbrenner, Making Human Beings Human: Bioecological Perspectives on Human Development (pp. 3-15). Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage D' Alessio, S. and Watkins, A. 2009. International Comparisons of Inclusive Policy and Practice: are we talking about the same thing? Research in Comparative and International Education Journal, 4(3), 233-249. DfES (Department for Education and Skills), 2014. Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years. Available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/send-code-of-practice-0-to-25 Dyson, A., 2005. Philosophy, politics and economics? The story of inclusive education in England. In: Mitchell, D, editor(s). Contextualising Inclusive Education: Evaluating old and new international perspectives (p. 63-88). Routledge. European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (EADSNE), 2004. Inclusive Education and Classroom Practice in Secondary Education. Literature Review. EADSNE: Middlefart. Available online at: http://www.european-agency.org Meijer, C. J. 2010. Special needs education in Europe: Inclusive policies and practices. Zeitschrift für Inklusion, 4(2). Naveed, A., Sakata, N., Kefallinou A., Young S. and Anand K., 2017. Understanding, embracing and reflecting upon the messiness of doctoral fieldwork, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 47:5. Rudduck, J., 2007. Student voice, student engagement, and school reform. International handbook of student experience in elementary and secondary school, 587-610. Squires, G., Kalambouka, A. and Bragg, J., 2016. A Study of the Experiences of Post Primary Students with Special Educational Needs: Research Report 23. NCSE, Dublin. Thomas, G. 2013. A review of thinking and research about inclusive education policy, with suggestions for a new kind of inclusive thinking. British Educational Research Journal, 39(3), 473-490. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2017. A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education. Paris: UNESCO Vlachou A. and Papananou I., 2015. Disabled students’ narratives about their schooling experiences, Disability & Society, 30:1, 73-86. Wood, E., 2003. The power of pupil perspectives in evidence‐based practice: the case of gender and underachievement, Research Papers in Education, 18:4, 365-383. Yin, R., 2009. Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.