Inclusion and the creation of inclusive learning environments have since the Salamanca statement (UNESCO, 1994) been both a means to an end and a goal in itself to create equitable schools as well as equitable societies across the world (Ainscow, Slee, & Best, 2019). Moreover, inclusion might also be a central premise for schools to meet a rapidly growing diversity in the student demographic landscape in Europe (Dyson & Berhanu, 2012; Wolff et al., 2021). However, there is far from any concord within the research community on how inclusion should be defined or how to implement inclusion in schools (Florian, 2019; Nilholm & Göransson, 2017). Therefore, the actual practice of creating inclusive learning environments is an area which merits further research.

Special Educational Needs Coordinators (SENCOs) play a central part in implementing inclusion by creating inclusive learning environments for all students (Abbott, McConkey, & Dobbins, 2011; Cole, 2005; Göransson, Lindqvist, & Nilholm, 2015). Previous research has shown that qualitative positive relationships are central, even essential, for a successful SENCO profession and for SENCOs’ ability to create inclusive learning environments (Aspelin, Östlund, & Jönsson, 2021; Maher, 2016). However, how, and where this work is performed by SENCOs is an area of research which needs to be further explored to better understand how inclusion can be implemented and possibly contribute to meet a growing diversity in the student demographic in Europe and across the world.

Aim and knowledge interest

Considering the brief introduction above, the current study aims to explore how SENCOs in Swedish Upper Secondary School utilize lived body and lived room in their everyday worklife to create and manage inclusive learning environments. A further aim is to understand how professional ethos and agency is expressed in the participants lived experiences. This is explored using a lifeworld phenomenological approach studying the participants lived experiences of creating and managing inclusive learning environments.

Research Questions

(i)             What are the SENCOs’ lived experiences of how lived body and lived room conduce and/or impede their agency in the creation and management of inclusive learning environments?

(ii)           What are the SENCOs' lived experiences of professional ethos and how it conduce and/or impede agency in their everyday worklife when managing and creating inclusive learning environments?

Methodology and Methods The study utilizes a lifeworld phenomenological approach. To study peoples’ lifeworlds, to study their lived experiences of a phenomenon, one has to be empathetic, flexible and accommodative to the participants as well as to the phenomenon under study (Bengtsson, 2013). The methods in the study are chosen in relation to its aim and research questions, thereby enabling the researcher to be true to the phenomenon under study (ibid.). The methods in this study are semi-structured lifeworld interviews and reflective open-ended diaries (Kvale, Brinkmann, & Torhell, 2014; Wildemuth, 2017). Three interviews were conducted with each participating SENCO and between these interviews the participants wrote diaries on two occasions. These two methods of generating empirical material combined with the design of the study created opportunity to be empathetic, flexible, and accommodative towards the participants as well as to the phenomenon under study. Nine participants were chosen for the study using purposeful sampling based on heterogenous characteristics (Patton, 2015). The heterogenous characteristics were that the participating SENCOs should work in small, medium, and large schools; in rural, suburban, and inner-city settings; at theoretical, vocational, and introductory programs and that they should have different lengths of work-experience as SENCOs. A further criterion for selection of the participants were that they currently should work as SENCOs at an upper secondary school. And, finally, the participants should have a Special Education Needs Coordinator’s degree according to SFS 1993:100, or later versions of the same degree. The analysis of the empirical material was hermeneutical leaning on the work of Gadamer (2013), placing the study within a interpretative phenomenological tradition. The analysis was performed using the hermeneutical circular movement and was aided by phenomenological concepts such as lived room, lived body, intersubjectivity, intercorporality (Merleau-Ponty, 2014; Schütz, 1967), and attending to the face of the Other (Levinas, 1969).

Expected Outcomes and early findings Preliminary results in the study suggests that the ethical aspects of SENCOs work, how they attend to the face of the Other (Levinas, 1969), seems to be a central premise for the SENCO profession and for how they approach a diverse student demographic when creating and managing inclusive learning environments. The SENCOs lived experiences imply that agency and the ability to create and manage inclusive learning environments is anchored in as well as driven by a professional ethos which seems to stand at the heart of what it means to be a SENCO. This suggests that empathy, compassion, and the wherewithal to stand up for and defend every student’s dignity and unequivocal right to education are central existential aspects of the SENCO profession. Furthermore, the lived experiences of the SENCOs indicate that relational work seem to be rooted primarily in informal aspects of the SENCOs’ everyday worklife and that the setting for this work is spread out in the school building and beyond. These lived experiences of the participating SENCOs could be interpreted as defining characteristics of the SENCO profession which seem to exhibit distinct interspatial as well as intercorporal aspects (Merleau-Ponty, 2014). On top of this, the intercorporal aspects , seem to be important for SENCOs’ agency and ability to create and uphold qualitative intersubjective relationships (Schütz, 1967). In conclusion, the study’s preliminary results indicate that there is an intertwinement of interspatial, intercorporal, ethical and intersubjective aspects in the SENCOs everyday worklife. These aspects seem to constitute fundamental existential features of the SENCO profession. These existential features of the profession seem to enable the SENCOs to have agency to create inclusive learning environments. The inclusive learning environments might possibly establish opportunity to accommodate the needs of a diverse student demographic.

Abbott, L., McConkey, R., & Dobbins, M. (2011). Key players in inclusion: are we meeting the professional needs of learning support assistants for pupils with complex needs? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 26(2), 215-231. Ainscow, M., Slee, R., & Best, M. (2019). Editorial: the Salamanca Statement: 25 years on. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7/8), 671-676. doi:10.1080/13603116.2019.1622800 Aspelin, J., Östlund, D., & Jönsson, A. (2021). ‘It means everything’: special educators’ perceptions of relationships and relational competence. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 36(5), 671-685. Bengtsson, J. (2013). With the Lifeworld as Ground. A Research Approach for Empirical Research in Education: The Gothenburg Tradition. Indo-Pacific journal of phenomenology, 13, 1-18. Cole, B. A. (2005). Mission impossible? Special educational needs, inclusion and the re-conceptualization of the role of the SENCO in England and Wales. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 20(3), 287-307. Dyson, A., & Berhanu, G. (2012). Special Education in Europe, Overrepresentation of Minority Students. In (Vol. 4, pp. 2070-2073). Florian, L. (2019). On the necessary co-existence of special and inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7-8), 691-704. Gadamer, H.-G. (2013). Truth and method: London New York : Bloomsbury Academic. Göransson, K., Lindqvist, G., & Nilholm, C. (2015). Voices of special educators in Sweden: a total-population study. Educational Research, 57(3), 287-304. Kvale, S., Brinkmann, S., & Torhell, S.-E. (2014). Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity : an essay on exteriority. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press. Maher, A. (2016). Consultation, negotiation and compromise: the relationship between SENCos, parents and pupils with SEN. Support for Learning, 31(1), 4-12. Merleau-Ponty, M. (2014). Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge. Nilholm, C., & Göransson, K. (2017). What is meant by inclusion? An analysis of European and North American journal articles with high impact. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 32(3), 437-451. Schütz, A. (1967). The phenomenology of the social world. Evanston: Northwestern Univ. Press. UNESCO. (1994, 7-10 June). The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Salamanca, Spain. Wildemuth, B. M. (2017). Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science (Second edition. ed.): Santa Barbara, California : Wolff, C. E., Huilla, H., Tzaninis, Y., Magnúsdóttir, B. R., Lappalainen, S., Paulle, B., . . . Kosunen, S. (2021). Inclusive education in the diversifying environments of Finland, Iceland and the Netherlands: A multilingual systematic review. Research in Comparative and International Education, 16, 3 - 21.