Schools as central educational institutions are under constant pressure of change in view of various societal requirements (social, economic, political). It is the task of educational research to analyze these developments and contribute to their understanding. Against this background dealing with heterogeneity in the context of school inclusion can be understood as one of the most important challenges for educational practice and research in the 21st century (Lütje-Klose et al. 2017).

Although (inclusive) schools are undisputedly involved in social discourses and relations, the dominant international (inclusive) school improvement theories (e.g. Dalin & Rolff 1990, Evans et al. 2012, Rolff 2016) focus primarily on the meso level of the individual schools - the social, historical, economic and political contexts of school development are not further discussed.

Berkemeyer (2016) accordingly argues that school improvement research approaches the relation between school, politics and society in an uncritical manner, which imposes restrictive consequences for its explanatory power and thus, for its general ability to advance understanding of the dimensions in question.

Following this observation, my dissertation asks which theoretical potentials and practical consequences result from a societal conceptualization of school development.

This research question implies the critical consideration of (a) the practices of (inclusive) schools, of school related change through (b) school improvement and of (c) school improvement theory, as the empirical and theoretical systematization of school development processes in its respective relationships to the (d) societal context, i.e. political reforms.

With regard to educational policy decisions, the societal, i.e. political, economic, social, interests of and effects on the conditions of schools and thus on school improvement processes cannot be overlooked (a-b-d). With every educational reform, the schools are asked to react to the innovations and to develop themselves.

However, school improvement theory (c) only seems to accompany these historical-political processes, the critical classification or questioning of the agendas pursued with the reform initiatives and their effects on the schools and its actors seems to be neither in the interest nor in the theoretical structure of school improvement models.

It can thus be stated that a critical discussion of current educational policy reforms and the associated shifts regarding the function of schools in and for society is currently not taking place within school theory or school improvement theory. Rather, these critical discussions take place in the area of General Educational Theory. 

It is the interest of this dissertation to investigate the potential of the overcoming of the outlined 'division of tasks' between a criticism of educational policy regimes (currently represented by General Educational Theory) on the one hand and the theorizing of specific challenges in the realm of (inclusive) school improvement (as the area of school improvement research) on the other hand. The goal is a theoretical conception of inclusive school development and improvement that reflects the social conditions of schools and its challenges.

In order to address the research question, it first becomes necessary to determine the current state of (inclusive) school policy and the current (inclusive) school development theory that relates to it or develops from it.

To this end, it is the aim of this thesis to develop a methodological and methodical approach that is able to grasp the object of (inclusive) school and school development in its complexity. Such an approach must be conceived in a multi-perspective, i.e. inter- and transdisciplinary way, in order to be able to fruitfully include the numerous subject areas relevant for the analysis and their specific theoretical assumptions and concepts. For this doctoral thesis, this means incorporating critical educational, sociological, and historical perspectives on the domains of school, society, and dis/ability.

The newly emerging theoretical and methodological approach of Disability Studies in Education (DSE) offers a first suitable point of reference for the development of a methodological approach. Within the DSE framework dis/ability is understood as a social construct that is inevitably values-laden and historically as well as culturally situated. “Thus, disability is not a thing or condition people have, but instead a social negotiation serving powerful ideological commitments and political aims” (Connor et al. 2008, p.447). The DSE approach offers a fundamentally societal conception of dis/ability and therefore opens the analysis to a critical investigation of educational policy and theory production regarding inclusive school development in their social, i.e. political, economic and cultural embeddedness. At this point of the analysis the approach of Historical-Materialist Policy Analysis (HMPA) will be engaged. “HMPA aims at analyzing how specific policies are formulated against the background of essentially competing and contradictory interests of different social forces” (Brand et al. 2021, p.1). The approach is historical-materialist as it analyses policies as embedded in historically developed material structures and complex social relations that form the ‘context’ of policy making (ibid. p. 2). Buckel et al. (2017) operationalize HMPA in a three-step, or rather iterative circular, process of (1) context analysis, (2) actor analysis and (3) process analysis. Within these analyses questions like the following are raised: Why did a specific policy (conflict) emerged at a specific moment in time? Who are the relevant actors within the conflict? How can the conflicted process of policy making be reconstructed? As both the DSE as well the HMPA approach are grounded on a critical, historicizing understanding of social phenomena they appear mutually useful for the development of a transdisciplinary methodological approach. On the basis of this social-theoretical toolkit, it will be possible to trace the developments in school-related inclusive educational policy making from the 1970s until today, employing document analyses of policy papers and historical sources (Hoffmann, 2018). According to the assumption that the development of scientific ideas and theories always constitutively corresponds with the socio-political conditions of a time and, moreover, often also directly or indirectly responds to concrete needs of educational policy, the development of school improvement theory since the 1970s will be reconstructed in a second step against the background of the analyses undertaken. This analysis will show the theoretical variety of school improvement paradigms developed in the last 50 years.

In summary, the aim of the paper is to use the historizing-societal analysis described above as a basis for determining the status of current (inclusive) school development policy and theory. From this analysis and critique initial indications for a societal-theoretically based inclusive school development conception can emerge. As Baglieri et al. (2011) state: “We know of no disagreement in education about whether people with disabilities should be afforded full equality. We know of no disagreement that educational arrangements and teaching practices should reach for the greatest extent of participation and should strive to eliminate segregation and isolation. […] To accomplish this progress, it is necessary to engage new thoughts and alternative philosophical perspectives and to welcome ideas that do not sit easily with current beliefs and assumptions” (Baglieri et al. 2011, p. 276, emphasis NM). The planned doctoral thesis aims to contribute to this end in employing newly emerging theoretical and methodological approaches to gain an understanding of the pressing issue of social inclusion (in schools and beyond) and, in the last instance, develop new ideas and solutions for inclusive ‘Education in a Changing World’. With regard to the format of the ECER Emerging Researcher Conference I would especially like the chance to discuss the innovative methodological framework the dissertation sets out to develop with my international colleagues.

Baglieri, S., Valle, J. W., Connor, D. J., & Gallagher, D. J. (2011). Disability studies in education: The need for a plurality of perspectives on disability. Remedial and special education, 32(4), 267-278. Brand, U., Krams, M., Lenikus, V., & Schneider, E. (2021). Contours of historical-materialist policy analysis. Critical Policy Studies, 1-18. Berkemeyer, N. (2016). Kritische Schulsystementwicklungsforschung–Entwurf eines Forschungsprogramms. Schulqualität–Bilanz und Perspektiven. Grundlagen der Qualität von Schule, 1, 201-220. Buckel, S., F. Georgi, J. Kannankulam, and J. Wissel. 2017. “The European Border Regime in Crisis. Theory, Methods and Analyses in Critical European Studies.” Study commissioned by the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation. Connor, D. J., Gabel, S. L., Gallagher, D. J., & Morton, M. (2008). Disability studies and inclusive education—implications for theory, research, and practice. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(5-6), 441-457. Dalin, P. & Rolff H.-G. (1990). Institutioneller Schulentwicklungsprozess. Bönen: Soester Verlags- kontor. Evans, L., Thornton, B., & Usinger, J. (2012). Theoretical frameworks to guide school improvement. NASSP bulletin, 96(2), 154-171. Hoffmann, N. (2018). Dokumentenanalyse in der Bildungs- und Sozialforschung. Überblick und Einführung. Weinheim und Basel: Beltz. Lütje-Klose, B., Miller, S., Schwab, S., & Streese, B. (Eds.). (2017). Inklusion: Profile für die Schul-und Unterrichtsentwicklung in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz: Theoretische Grundlagen-Empirische Befunde-Praxisbeispiele. Waxmann Verlag. Rolff, H.-G. (2016). Schulentwicklung kompakt. Modelle, Instrumente, Perspektiven. 3. ed. Weinheim und Basel: Beltz. Schalk, S. (2017). Critical disability studies as methodology. Lateral, 6(1), 6-1.