Introduction

Over the past decade, the concept of inclusive education has received increased global attention. At this point in time, more than 160 countries have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (United Nations, 2006). Amongst other mandates, the convention clearly demands the unrestricted access to inclusive education for all students (Powell, Edelstein & Blanck, 2016). However, placing students with different abilities and needs in the same classroom cannot be considered as a sufficient condition for inclusion (Stein & Stein, 2014). It rather requires the continuous and comprehensive promotion of the student’s emotional, social and academic development (Venetz et. al, 2015). This overarching pedagogical objective does not exclusively refer to the inclusive education system – it rather applies both for mainstream classes and special classes (Stein & Stein, 2014). In the past, numerous studies have addressed students with special educational needs (SEN) in general and investigated on multiple indicators of emotional, social and academic inclusion (e.g. Schwinger et al, 2020; Stelling, 2018) However, there is a distinct lack of studies attempting to research on the subjective indicators of emotional, social and academic inclusion – particularly regarding students with diagnosed behavioral, social and emotional difficulties (BESD).

Students with BESD:

Integrating students with BESD into class is widely considered as one of the major challenges of today’s school systems. The collective term “BESD” includes various different behavioral manifestations, which directly affect essential educational dimensions, such as classroom management, learning environment and group dynamic processes (cf. Laubenstein, 2016). A large number of international epidemiological findings support a two-dimensional model of BESD in childhood and adolescence consisting of internalizing disorders, comprising anxiety, depression and social withdrawal and externalizing disorders, comprising delinquent and aggressive behavior (e.g.: Ellert, Brettschneider & Ravens-Sieberer, 2014). Those distinctive dimensions of behavioral disorders were used to categorize and operationalize BESD within the study.

Self-Perception of Inclusion:

In accordance with the theoretical framework of Venetz et al. (2015), inclusion is considered to be a primarily subjective process. Within this theoretical model, the self-perception of social, emotional and academic inclusion functions as the key indicator for educational success. The authors define three fundamental dimensions of inclusion, namely the student´s perception of: (1) emotional well-being in school (emotional inclusion), (2) social relationships with other students (social inclusion) and (3) academic competences (academic inclusion). The outlined model represented the theoretical reference point of the study.

The teacher’s mode of interaction:

The requirement to respond to the student´s diversity in school has generated new demanding challenges for teachers. The teacher’s ability to adjust teaching methods and instructional practices has become a vital condition for successful inclusion (Armstrong et al., 2011). Several studies suggest a strong correlation between specific dimensions of the teacher´s mode of interaction and the student´s self-perception of emotional, social and academic inclusion (e.g.: Leflot, Onghena & Colpin, 2010). Two essential dimensions have been proven to be powerful: (1) a “caring” mode of social interaction and (2) a “reduced pressure for academic achievement”. These dimensions were used to operationalize the teacher´s mode of interaction within the study.

This study focuses on students with BESD and aims at researching on (1) self-perceived inclusion and (2) perception of the teacher´s mode of interaction, depending on behavioral pattern (internalizing vs. externalizing) and the attended school (mainstream vs. special). Furthermore, (3) the fundamental link between student´s self-perceptions and perceived teacher behavior is investigated.

Research questions: Prior research on the inclusion of students with SEN has indicated that mainstream schooling might have a tendency of causing negative effects on emotional, social and academic dimensions of self-perceived inclusion (e.g. Tracey, Marsh & Craven, 2003). With special regard to students with BESD, the following research questions were formulated: 1. Do students with BESD differ in their self-perceived social, emotional and academic inclusion, depending on behavioral pattern (internalizing vs. externalizing) and on attended school (mainstream vs. special)? (Multivariate Analysis of Variance I) 2. Do students with BESD differ in their perception of the teacher´s mode of interaction, depending on behavioral pattern (internalizing vs. externalizing) and on attended school (mainstream vs. special)? (Multivariate Analysis of Variance II) 3. (How) can the perceived mode of teacher interaction predict self-perception of inclusion of students with BESD? (Path Analysis and Multigroup Analysis) In order to examine these research questions, N=119 students with BESD from grade 5 to 8 in mainstream and special school classes were questioned about their self-perceived emotional inclusion (construct: wellbeing at school), social inclusion (construct: social self-concept) and academic inclusion (construct: academic self-concept) with the repeatedly and cross-culturally validated “Perceptions of Inclusion Questionnaire” (PIQ), developed by Venetz et al. (2015). The students were also questioned about their perception of the teacher´s mode of interaction with a contemporarily reformulated version of the “Landauer Skalen zum Sozialklima” (LASSO, van Saldern & Littig, 1987). Additionally, the responsible N=28 teachers for SEN categorized their students with BESD according to the predominant behavioral pattern. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis as well as reliability analysis prove an adequate operationalization of the included constructs. In order to examine possible differences between the groups, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was applied (Questions 1 and 2). The fundamental Link between the perceived teacher´s mode of interaction and the self-perception of inclusion was examined through path analysis (PA). Concerning the perceived teacher´s mode of interaction the behavioral dimensions “caring” and “pressure for achievement” represented the exogenous variables relating to the student´s perception of emotional, social and academic inclusion (Question 3). Furthermore, through multiple group analysis (MGA) it was also tested, if attended school (mainstream vs. special) and predominant behavioral patterns (externalizing and internalizing) function as moderating variables.

Findings: The following results provide indications about the relation between behavioral patterns, attended school, self-perceptions in school and the perception of selected aspects of teacher behavior. Concerning students with BESD the results of MANOVA indicate that academic self-perception (F(1.91)=21.012; p<.000; partial η2=.188) and perception of the teacher´s mode of interaction in the dimensions “caring” (F(1.93)=5,637; p=.020; partial η2=.058) and “pressure for achievement” (F(1.93)=24.960; p>.000; partial η2=.215) is significantly more positive in special school classes than in mainstream school classes. Social self-perception (F(1.91)=4.884; p=.030; partial η2=.051) and academic self-perception (F(1.91)=4.503; p=.037; partial η2=.047) of students with internalizing behavioral patterns prove to be significantly more negative than those of students with externalizing tendencies. Descriptive statistics indicate that especially students with internalizing behavioral patterns in mainstream school classes are affected by negative self-perceptions and negative perception of class teacher´s behavior in school. Results of PA indicate, that a “caring” mode of interaction can predict positive emotional (

Armstrong D., Amstrong A. C., Spandagou I. (2011). Inclusion: by choice or by chance? Int. J. Inclusive Educ. 15, 29–39. Ellert, U., Brettschneider, A.-K. & Ravens-Sieberer, U. (2014). Gesundheitsbezogene Lebensqualität bei Kindern und Jugendlichen in Deutschland. Bundesgesundheitsblatt, 57, 789-806. Laubenstein, D. (2016). Perspektiven der Pädagogik bei Unterstützungsbedarf der emotionalen und sozialen Entwicklung. Zeitschrift für Heilpädagogik, 67(11), 492-502. Leflot, G., Onghena, P. & Colpin, H. (2010). Teacher-Child Interactions: Relations with Children´s Self-Concept in Second Grade. Infant and Child Development, 19, 385-405. Powell, J. J. W., Edelstein, B., & Blanck, J. M. (2016). Awarenessraising, legitimation or backlash? Effects of the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities on education systems in Germany. Glob., Soc. and Ed., 14, 227–250. Saldern, M., v. & Littig, K. E. (1987): Lasso — Landauer Skalen zum Sozialklima. Weinheim. Stein, R. & Stein, A. (2014). Unterricht bei Verhaltensstörungen. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt Verlag. Schwinger, M, Trautner, M., Otterpohl, N., Lütje-Klose, B. & Wild, E. (2020). Dabei sein ist alles? Psychosoziale Entwicklung von Kindern mit Förderschwerpunkt Lernen in inklusiven vs. Exklusiven Fördersettings. Stein, R. & Stein, A. (2015). Unterricht bei Verhaltensstörungen. Ein integratives didaktisches Modell. 2. überarbeitete und aktualisierte Auflage. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt Verlag. Stelling, S. (2018). Schulisches Wohlbefinden von Kindern mit sonderpädagogischem Förderbedarf Lernen. Bielefeld: Universitätsbibliothek. United Nations. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and optional protocol. New York, NY: United Nations. Tracey, D., Marsh, H. W. & Craven, R. G. (2003). Self-concepts of preadolescent students with mild intellectual disabilities. Int. Adv. in Self Res., Vol. 1, 203-230. Venetz, M., Zurbriggen, C. L. A., Eckhart, M. et al. (2015). The Perceptions of Inclusion Questionnaire (PIQ). English Version.