A lack of diversity – in terms of socio-economic status, ethnicity, (dis)ability, etc. – within the teaching profession is recognised internationally, in contrast to today's student population (Schleicher, 2014). Nevertheless, there is a dearth of research in this area, especially in relation to disability, even if the CRPD (Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, United Nations, 2006, Article 24.4) explicitly mentions that schools should recruit persons with disabilities as education staff.  

According to Keane, Heinz and Eaton (2018), rationales for teachers with disabilities' widening participation firstly relate to their assumed benefits, since they embody inclusive values and practices. On the other hand, this participation gap can be read in an ‘equity of access’ perspective, since their underrepresentation is probably related to the barriers they encounter at different stages of teaching profession, starting from entering the Initial Teacher Training (ITT).  

In this paper we focus on student teachers with disabilities in ITT, even if our research project “BECOM-IN: becoming a teacher with a disability” also investigates the opinions and experiences of ITT faculty members and in-service teachers with disabilities. Another paper related to the latter has been submitted for ECER 2021. 

Regarding student teachers with disabilities, the few studies already existing show that they face unique challenges. Decisions about disclosing their disability are "fraught with personal and environmental considerations" (Von Schrader, Malzer, & Bruyère, 2014, p. 252) and often they are postponed until after students have a chance to show themselves to be successful in the classroom (Riddick, 2003). Some papers report also cultural barriers and prejudiced views in the context of ITT (Bargerhuff, Cole & Teeters, 2012). Conversely, among the factors that research has pointed out as helping student teachers there is the good relationship with mentors who are prepared to address their needs (Csoli & Gallagher, 2012; Griffiths, 2012). Research also underlines the importance of coping strategies developed actively by student teachers (such as mental rehearsal or aide-memoires; Riddick, 2003; Griffiths, 2012; Parker & Draves, 2017), as effective ways to overcome the barriers. 

Moreover, it should be noted that the ITT is subject to professional standards that include knowledge, skills and competences that student teachers are expected to meet. Consequently, tensions between students with disabilities’ right to receive reasonable and tailored accommodations and the ITT’s responsibility to certify competent teachers, according to standardised competence profile, often emerge and culminate in a “dilemma of professional competence”. In this regard, studies that analysed how universities adapted (or not) the selection procedure for student candidates with disabilities report that institutions often provide accommodations of the same type, mainly extra time, in the concern that the requirements of the entry procedure are not compromised (Riddick & English, 2006; Sharoni & Vogel, 2007). During the coursework too, faculty members appear to be willing to use accommodations that respect the standards and do not alter the nature of tasks (such as note takers), whereas some doubts about fairness issues are expressed when considering measures like an alternative exam type (Baldwin, 2007; Leyser et al., 2011). This aspect is amplified in practicum, where the accommodations raise deep ethical concerns among faculty members and mentors (Baldwin, 2007; Leyser et al., 2011; Sokal, Woloshyn, & Wilson, 2017). 

In Italy, where the “BECOM-IN” project recently started, research on these topics is basically non-existent. More specifically, our research aims to explore: (1) how student teachers with disabilities address the “dilemma of professional competence” in ITT (2) the barriers, the facilitators (see WHO, 2001) and the coping strategies developed for entering and completing ITT (3) the perceived impact (in terms of benefits) of their inclusion in teaching profession. 

Overall, in the “BECOM-IN” project we used a two-phase explanatory mixed-methods- design study (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007). In Study 1, a survey was used to explore the topics among representatives of ITT working at all 33 Italian university offering the programme (namely Directors of ITT; Rector’s Delegates of disability, 3 faculty members in the fields of math, Italian and English for each institution and 2 mentors for each institution). In Study 2, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 student teachers with disabilities to discuss the issues in-depth. 4 Italian Universities among the 33 surveyed were identified and purposefully selected on the basis of quantitative results. Then, 4 student teachers with sensorial, physical and learning disabilities for each institution were recruited. Potential participants responded to a call for volunteers launched in the 4 universities to participate in this study. Semi-structured individual interviews, ranging from 30 to 60 minutes in length, were conducted online due to the COVID-19 situation. The interview protocol was piloted. The pilot phase resulted in minor modifications to improve the questions’ clarity and the order. Questions were developed from relevant student teachers with disabilities literature and from the constructs emerged in Study 1. The interview protocol contained five macro-sections: (a) background information (b) barriers, facilitators and coping strategies encountered/developed (c) the use of reasonable accommodations and eventual academic staff' s reluctance to offer them (“dilemma of professional competence”) (d) ways to address the dilemma (e) perceived benefits of a future teacher with disability. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. In line with our ethical position, anonymity was aided by the removal of any identifiable attributes. Data are currently being analysed by means of Qualitative Content Analysis (Kuckartz, 2012). The MAXQDA qualitative data analysis program is used for coding. Both inductive and deductive categories are used. Inductive categories are based on the research questions and assume some contents as relevant a priori, on the basis of the literature review. Deductive categories are created on the basis of the interviews text by means of the procedure described by Kuckartz (2012). To begin, three coders independently reviewed interview transcripts and then collaboratively discussed and agreed upon coding strategies. Two coders followed the same process with the second and third interview. Thereafter, each coder independently is coding the remainder of the data, with eventual coding issues collaboratively resolved.

Background information shows that our participants vary in age and level of experience: from first-year students with little-to-none experience of university life, to students approaching their thesis dissertation. Some of them have started their university studies choosing another path and then changed towards Primary Education. The interviewed students demonstrate a high degree of self-consciousness about their educational needs, the barriers they might encounter in their studies, and the facilitators that can help them. They tend to request and use them, asking for recognition of their rights also when university professors deny their support. Younger students tend to rely more on older students’ experiences, in order to avoid direct confrontation with more difficult situations. Coping strategies related to study and preparation for exams vary a lot, from undertaking courses about effective study methods to enrolling for Erasmus periods abroad. Besides these differences, the group of participants seems very much oriented towards using all possible facilitators and to deal with the challenges of their learning path. If learning difficulties are generally faced adopting personal coping strategies, the perception of the existence of a “dilemma of professional competence” is less homogeneous. In general, students imagine themselves as prepared and competent future teachers, able to “give something more” to future schoolchildren, especially those with Special Educational Needs. However, this thought is not always accompanied by a reflection on the challenges of their current studies and lacks proper consideration of some aspects of their professional future (i.e., the relationship and communication with parents). From the thematic analysis conducted so far, and connecting the experiences of student teachers with those of teachers already employed in schools, we expect that some significant differences will emerge, related to the overall expectations about the level of inclusion of the school system.

Baldwin, J. L. (2007). Teacher candidates with learning disabilities: Effective and ethical accommodations. Teacher Education and Special Education, 30(3), 128-141. Bargerhuff, M., Cole, D., Teeters, L. (2012). Using a transdisciplinary model to address inequities in field placements for teacher candidates with disabilities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(2), 185-206. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Csoli, K., Gallagher, T. L. (2012). Accommodations in teacher education: Perspectives of teacher candidates with learning disabilities and their faculty advisors. Exceptionality Education International, 22(2), 61–76. Griffiths, S. (2012). ‘Being Dyslexic Doesn’t Make Me Less of a Teacher’. School Placement Experiences of Student Teachers with Dyslexia: Strengths, Challenges and a Model for Support. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12 (2), 54–65. WHO (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Keane, E., Heinz, M., Eaton, P. (2018). Fit (ness) to teach?: disability and initial Teacher education in the republic of Ireland. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 22(8), 819-838. Kuckartz, U. (2012). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung, Weinheim/Basel, Beltz Juventa. Leyser, Y., Greenberger, L., Sharoni, V., Vogel, G. (2011). Students with disabilities in teacher education: Changes in faculty attitudes toward accommodations over ten years. International Journal of Special Education, 26(1), 162–174. Parker, E., Draves, T. (2017). A narrative of two preservice music teachers with visual impairment. Journal of Research in Music Education, 64(4), 385–404. Riddick, B. (2003). Experiences of Teachers and Trainee Teachers Who Are Dyslexic. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 7(4), 389-402. Riddick, B., English, E. (2006). Meeting the standards? Dyslexic students and the selection process for initial teacher training. European Journal of Teacher Education, 29(2), 203– 222. Schleicher, A. (2014). Equity, Excellence and Inclusiveness in Education: Policy Lessons from around the World. Background report for the International Summit on the Teaching profession. Paris: OECD. Sharoni, V., Vogel, G. (2007). Entrance test accommodations, admission and enrollment of students with learning disabilities in teacher training colleges in Israel. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(3), 255–270. Sokal, L., Woloshyn, D., Wilson, A. (2017). Pre-service teachers with disabilities: challenges and opportunities for directors of student teaching in western Canada. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(3), 1–18. Von Schrader, S., Malzer, V., Bruyère, S. (2014). Perspectives on Disability Disclosure: The Importance of Employer Practices and Workplace Climate. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 26(4), 237–255.