Research questions, objectives, and theoretical framework

This paper compares secondary school teachers’ narratives on the inclusion of students with migrant backgrounds in Italy and Norway. The research question is: 

How do secondary school teachers narrate the inclusion of students with migrant backgrounds in Italy and Norway?

Since the 90s, Italy and Norway have considered inclusion a core value of their educational systems. The two countries share, in some respects, a common migration history, starting to turn from emigration countries to immigration countries at the end of the 20^th century. Following the international policy pathways of inclusion (Caputo, 2012; Hilt, 2020) and in response to the increasing migration flows, the contents and principles of the Salamanca Statement (Unesco, 1994) have been gradually translated within the Italian and Norwegian national educational systems (Caputo, 2012; Nilsen, 2010). Despite these similarities, the two countries have developed different policy narratives on the inclusion of students with migrant backgrounds. Italy embraced a so-called “intercultural” approach where the policy narrative is based on explicit ideological instances and employs normative-laden language (Caputo 2012; Rompianesi & Hilt, in review). On the other hand, the Norwegian “inclusion” approach seems to turn towards a de-politicization of the terms employed in education policy documents and to develop more “technocratic” narratives (Burner et al., 2018; Rompianesi & Hilt, in review). In this regard, Norway and Italy represent a good example of how common international principles can be differently translated and narrated in their travel from the international sphere to the national dimension, even in countries with a similar migration history (Robertson & Dale, 2017).

In this peculiar scenario, it becomes relevant for international educational research to study from a comparative perspective the narratives on inclusion, not just at the macro (policy) level but also at the meso (school/institution)and micro (teacher/student) levels. Regarding teachers’ practices, Italian and Norwegian teachers seem to have ambiguous representations of inclusion and diversity (Arnesen et al., 2007; Burner et al., 2018; Tarozzi, 2006). Many Italian teachers underline the existence of a “gap” between inclusive/intercultural principles and practices (Tarozzi, 2012) and perceive inclusion as a “ghost model” (Tarozzi, 2012, p. 399) promoted by national policy narratives but hard to put into practice. In this regard, there is a lack of studies that address how secondary school teachers narrate their experiences with inclusive/intercultural education. There is also a lack of studies on how such narratives are structured in countries that share a common set of core educational principles but have developed different public narratives on the inclusion of students with migrant backgrounds.

The theoretical framework of the study is rooted in Bruner’s socio-constructivist perspective (Bruner, 1977) and narrative theory (Bruner, 1996). Narratives are understood “as a mode of thinking, as a structure for organizing our knowledge, and as a vehicle in the process of education” (Bruner, 1996, p. 119). Personal and collective narratives take shape in a shared social, cultural, and symbolic space, where knowledge is constructed through interactions with others. They can embed stories – with a beginning and an end – as well as arguments, concepts, and representations of the world. In this regard, Bruner’s so-called narrative principle highlights the narrative nature of human discourse and allows us to investigate narrative thinking as one of the ways we make sense of reality and our own experiences (Bruner, 1991, 2004).

The study employs a comparative qualitative research method. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a sample of 8 Norwegian and 8 Italian upper secondary school teachers who work in a multicultural classroom environment. The informants will be selected via purposive sampling, that is, on the basis of “their typicality or possession of the particular characteristic(s) being sought” (Cohen et al. 2018, p. 218). Interviews are considered in this study as a research method through which it is possible to build meaning in a dialogue between interviewees and interviewers (Brinkmann & Kvale, 2015). The interviews will last between 45 and 60 minutes and will be divided into two parts. 1. The first part will focus on how the informants give meaning to educational phenomena related to inclusion in their teaching practice. The dialogue with teachers will focus on stories and experiences they perceive as relevant and/or meaningful in relation to themes such as inclusion, interculturalism, intercultural dialogue, multiculturalism, and cultural diversity. The interview guide includes broad questions which are intended to help the respondent to focus on their personal experience, such as: a. As a teacher, what do you think when you think about the “inclusion” of students with migrant backgrounds? b. When and how would you define your classroom as “inclusive”? c. Is there an episode that you feel to be related to the “inclusion” (or “exclusion”) of students with migrant backgrounds? Would you like to tell me about it? d. How did you act in such a context? e. Is there anything you would have done differently? The semi-structured interviews will be carried out with a high degree of flexibility. That will allow the informants to answer the questions at their own pace and limit any unintentional directivity of the interviewer (Cohen et al., 2018). 2. The second part of the interview will consist of the discussion of two cases – that is, plausible everyday classroom situations in which the topics of inclusion and cultural differences play a relevant role in the educational processes. The cases will be cross-nationally comparable by ensuring a culturally sensitive perspective (Osborn, 2004). Reflexivity as a research practice will play a pivotal role. Attention will be paid “to the way different kinds of linguistic, social, political and theoretical elements are woven together in the process of knowledge development, during which empirical material is constructed, interpreted and written” (Alvesson & Sköldberg, 2009, p.9).

By investigating teachers’ narratives on inclusion, I will collect new insights into how they make sense of “inclusion” and “interculturalism” in their teaching practices. From the perspective of constructivism and narrative theory (Bruner, 1991, 1996, 2004), the informants’ stories, episodes, and narrative plots will shed new light on how teachers represent the inner tensions and paradoxes that characterize inclusion and interculturalism. One expected outcome is that such concepts might be narrated as loose constructs with blurred conceptual outlines. At the same time, as concepts characterized by a certain degree of inner vagueness, they can leave space for teachers to create their inclusive practices with a higher degree of autonomy (Hilt & Rompianesi, forthcoming). In this regard, the comparative perspective adds an additional layer of complexity and can lead to valuable insights. As mentioned above, Italy and Norway share a similar migration history and inclusion as a core value of their educational system; nonetheless, they developed different national policy narratives regarding the inclusion of students with migrant backgrounds. Comparing teachers’ narratives in both countries can highlight similarities and differences at the meso and micro levels. Furthermore, the results can provide insights in relation to the national policy narratives (Rompianesi & Hilt, in review) to understand if – and to what extent – public and teachers’ narratives share some common traits.

Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Arnesen, A., Mietola, R., & Lahelma, E. (2007). Language of inclusion and diversity: Policy discourses and social practices in Finnish and Norwegian schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110600601034 Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). InterViews. Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. Bruner, J. S. (1977). The Process of Education. A Landmark in Educational Theory. Harvard University Press. Bruner, J. S. (1991). The Narrative Construction of Reality. Critical Inquiry, 18, 1–21. Bruner, J. S. (1996). The Culture of Education. Harvard University Press. Bruner, J. S. (2004). Life as Narrative. Social Research, 71(3), 691–710. Burner, T., Nodeland, T. S., & Aamaas, Å. (2018). Critical Perspectives on Perceptions and Practices of Diversity in Education. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 2(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.2188 Caputo, M. (2012). Interculturalità. Pedagogia Oggi, 1, 199–230. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education. Eight Edition (8th ed.). Routledge. Hilt, L. T. (2020). Integrering og Utdanning. Fagbokforlaget. Hilt, L. T., & Rompianesi, T. (Forthcoming). Multicultural tact: representing the world in multicultural societies. In Kalisha, W. and T. Szkudlarek (Eds.) (forthcoming) Nextgen Children. Springer Philosophy Series. Nilsen, S. (2010). Moving towards an educational policy for inclusion? Main reform stages in the development of the Norwegian unitary school system. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14(5), 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110802632217 Osborn, M. (2004). New Methodologies for Comparative Research? Establishing ‘Constants’ and ‘Contexts’ in Educational Experience. Oxford Review of Education, 30(2), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305498042000215566 Robertson, S., & Dale, R. (2017). Comparing Policies in a Globalizing World: Methodological reflections. Educação & Realidade, 42, 859–876. https://doi.org/10.1590/2175-623670056 Rompianesi, T. & L. Hilt (In review). ‘Heroes’, ‘Victims’, and ‘Villains’: Policy Narratives on Inclusion in Norwegian and Italian Educational Documents. Intercultural Education. Tarozzi, M. (Ed.). (2006). Il senso dell’intercultura. Ricerca sulle pratiche di accoglienza, intercultura e integrazione in Trentino. Provincia Autonoma di Trento - IPRASE del Trentino. Tarozzi, M. (2012). Intercultural or multicultural education in Europe and the United States. In B. Della Chiesa, J. Scott, & C. Hinton (Eds.), Languages in a Global World: Learning for Better Cultural Understanding (pp. 393–406). OECD Publishing. Unesco. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Unesco.