The foundation of inclusive education is a belief that all students belong and are valued members of their neighbourhood school communities (Porter & Towell, 2017). Inclusive education promotes equity through respect for diversity. Since the issuance of the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994), governments globally have focused on the development of inclusive education systems. Educational settings that promote inclusion are more successful in achieving learning for all (Krämer et al., 2021), the ultimate goal of education. Teachers who have adopted inclusive teaching approaches are able to improve academic standards for all students (Jordan, 2018).

Even when placed in inclusive classrooms, many students with disabilities do not participate optimally in the academic or social life of the classroom. Significant concerns remain about the capacity for schools to effectively support the diversity of learners present in schools and the capacity for traditional educational  approaches to support inclusion (Graham, 2020). As a result, many students with disabilities are still segregated; they still experience negative classroom climates and peer interactions; they are still alienated and bullied; and they still fail to reach their academic potential (Reid et al., 2018). The challenge is to equip and empower teachers with the competence and confidence required to effectively teach all students in inclusive classrooms. Pre-service teacher education programs and in-service professional development are key in teachers’ development of effective instructional practices for inclusive classrooms.

 It is known that for successful school inclusion teachers must possess the belief that all children belong in the neighbourhood school and the belief that they are responsible and have the competence to teach them (Jordan, 2018). Teacher self-efficacy, the belief that one is a capable educator, is known to influence teacher professional commitment, resilience, teacher performance, and student achievement (Holzberger, Philipp, Kunter, 2013). Teacher self-efficacy is a key competency for teachers in inclusive classrooms. Teachers with high self-efficacy work harder and persist longer to assist students who experience learning challenges (Woolfolk, Hoy, Hoy, & Davis, 2009). Teachers need to gain theoretical and practical knowledge that prepares them for their teaching practice; and also possess the belief that they are responsible for the education of all of their students within diverse classrooms (Jordan et al., 2009). Specht and Metsala (2018) found that for Canadian pre-service teachers preparing to teach secondary grades, significant predictors were gender, the amount of diverse teaching experience, their beliefs regarding the stability of academic ability, and their beliefs toward the use of extrinsic rewards to motivate learning. Miesera and Gebhardt (2018) noted that Canadian preservice teachers had higher self-efficacious beliefs than German preservice teachers and more experience with people with disabilities. Differing educational contexts between countries may lead to varying teacher experiences that contribute to these effects. In fact, Specht et al., (2022) determined that Canadian preservice teachers more often discussed mentoring experiences as contributing to their inclusive practice when compared to German preservice teachers. It was suggested that the difference could be in the way in which each country views themselves in the preservice program. To date, the factors that influence the efficacy of early career teachers have not been compared amongst the two countries. As a result, the current paper will investigate issues as they relate to early career teachers (those within their first 3 years) to determine if differences exist with respect to the predictors of efficacy for inclusive practice with a particular focus on country of teaching.

The following questions were addressed

Do beginning teachers from Germany and Canada differ in their efficacy for inclusive practice?

How do beginning teachers’ country, gender, experience with individuals with diverse educational needs, and beliefs about inclusion influence their self-efficacy?

Participants Participants from both countries were in their first year of teaching. Canadians were 110 teachers (81 women) with an age range 21–52 years. German participants were 90 teachers (41 women) with an age range 25-45 years. Measures During their first year of teaching, participants completed the following measures online. Level of personal and professional experience were measured using a 4-point Likert scale ranging from no experience to extensive experience. Participants completed the Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practice questionnaire (TEIP; see Sharma et al., 2012), which assessed their feelings of teacher efficacy as their teacher education programs concluded. Reponses on each of the 18 items on this scale are indicated on a 6-point Likert scale (higher scores indicate higher self-efficacy). Sharma et al. reported three factors on this self-efficacy scale: Efficacy in Collaboration, which measures the participants’ self-perceptions of working with parents and colleagues in the schools; Efficacy in Managing Behaviour, referring to sense of competence in dealing with disruptive behaviours in the classroom; and Efficacy to Use Inclusive Instruction, which refers to the use of teaching strategies consistent with the inclusion of all learners. Each scale has been found to have high internal reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha of 0.85, 0.85, and 0.93, respectively (Sharma et al., 2012). Participants’ beliefs about their roles and responsibilities for including students with exceptional needs in the classroom, including those with disabilities or at risk for academic failure, were measured with the Beliefs About Learning and Teaching Questionnaire (BLTQ, see Glenn, 2018). Responses for the 20 items were on a 6-point Likert scale, and four factors are reported: Student-Centred Instruction, with high scores representing beliefs that students’ needs and the learning process are the focus of teachers’ instruction-based decisions; Teacher-Controlled Instruction, for which high scores indicate beliefs that a teacher’s focus is on transmitting information; Entity- Increment, with high scores1 indicating beliefs that students’ learning ability is a fixed rather than a malleable trait that is relatively impervious to good instruction; and Attaining Standards, for which high scores represent beliefs that external rewards, such as high grades, are primary motivators for students. A perspective consistent with a positive outlook on inclusion would include high scores on the Student-Centred scale, and low scores on and Entity-Increment, Teacher Controlled, and Attaining Standards scales. Cronbach’s alpha for the four scales are: .66, .73, .64, and .70, respectively (Glenn, 2018). These values are considered acceptable (Bacon, 2004).

Comparison of Efficacy We conducted a MANOVA to examine the effects of country and gender on the three self-efficacy subscales; the effect of country was significant, F(3,194) = 17.878, p < .001; Wilks’ Λ = .783, ηp 2 = .217 as was the effect of gender F(3,194) = 4.209 p < .01; Wilks’ Λ = .939, ηp 2 = .061. The interaction was not significant. Follow-up univariate tests showed that Canadian beginning teachers had higher overall self-efficacy for both collaboration and inclusive instruction, associated with a large and medium effect size, respectively (ηp 2= .170 & .108); the groups did not differ on efficacy for managing behaviour. Follow-up tests for gender showed that males had higher self-efficacy for managing behaviour, a difference associated with a small to medium effect size (ηp 2=.048); there were no effects of gender for the other two factors. Prediction of Efficacy We ran a series of hierarchical regression analyses for each self-efficacy subscale in turn with the following variables entered: country, gender, personal experience, professional experience, entity-increment beliefs, student-centred instruction beliefs, teacher controlled instruction beliefs, and attaining standards beliefs. The results were as follows: (a) Being in the Canadian sample and having more professional and personal experience each contributed, in turn, to beginning teachers’ higher self-efficacy for collaboration, as did having higher student-centred instruction beliefs. (b) Beginning teachers increasing amount of professional and personal experience was positively associated with higher self-efficacy for managing behaviour, as was their gender, with males having higher self-efficacy. (c) Being in the Canadian sample and having student-centred instruction beliefs predicts high teacher efficacy for inclusive instruction Results will be compared using the frameworks of inclusive education training programs between the two countries and the potential importance of raising all inservice teachers’ knowledge and experience with student-centred practices.

Glenn, C. V. (2018). The measurement of teacher’s beliefs about ability: Development of the Beliefs About Learning and Teaching Questionnaire. Exceptionality Education International, 28, 51-66. Graham, L. (2020). Inclusive education in the 21st century. In L. Graham (Ed.), Inclusive Education for the 21st Century: Theory, policy and practice (pp. 3–26). Routledge. Jordan, A. (2018). The Supporting Effective Teaching Project: 1. Factors influencing student success in inclusive elementary classrooms. Exceptionality Education International, 28, 10–27. Jordan, A., Schwartz, E., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2009). Preparing teachers for inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 535-542. Krämer, S., Möller, J., & Zimmermann, F. (2021). Inclusive education of students with general learning difficulties: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 91(3), 432–478. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654321998072 Miesera, S. Gebhardt, M. (2018). Inclusive vocational schools in Canada and Germany. A comparison of vocational pre-service teachers ′ attitudes, self-efficacy and experiences towards inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education 33(5), 707-722. DOI: 10.1080/08856257.2017.1421599 Porter, G. L., & Towell, D. (2017). Advancing inclusive education: Keys to transformational change in public education systems. https://inclusiveeducation.ca/2017/04/21/advancing-inclusive-education Reid, L., Bennett, S., Specht, J., White, R., Somma, M., Li, X., Lattanzio, R., Gavan, K., Kyle, G., Porter, G., & Patel, A. (2018). If inclusion means everyone, why not me? https://www.inclusiveeducationresearch.ca/events/inclusive_education_news.html Sharma, U., Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2012). Measuring teacher efficacy to implement inclusive practices. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01200.x Specht, J., & Metsala, J. (2018). Predictors of teacher efficacy for inclusive practice in pre-service teachers. Exceptionality Education International, 28(3), 67-82 Specht, J., Miesera, S., McGhie-Richmond, D., & Haider, F. (2022). Experiences that shape the development of inclusive instruction in preservice teachers: An international comparison. European Journal of Special Education Research, 8(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejse.v8i4.4436 UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca Statement Framework. Woolfolk Hoy, A., Hoy, W.K., & Davis, H. (2009). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. In A. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation in school (pp. 627-654). Mahwah, N.J: Erlbaum.