Promoting inclusive education [IE] is a responsibility of adults in the school system, aimed at ensuring equitable access to education for all students and reducing marginalization. This includes enabling students with diverse needs to reach their potential and fully participate in society, integral to promoting IE. Nearly three decades ago, Norway and several other European countries ratified the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) and committed to UNESCO’s principles of IE and working towards providing education for all. UNESCO’s (2009) inclusion guidelines describe IE as dynamic processes that 1) addresses and meets the diverse needs of all students (p. 8); 2) aims to increase participation; and 3) actively works to diminish exclusion “from and within education” (p. 9). The Norwegian white paper “Early intervention and inclusive education” (Meld. St. 6 (2019-2020)), highlights the need to enhance the schools’ support systems through interprofessional collaboration [IPC] between professionals within and outside of school. IPC is seen as crucial to meet the students’ needs and foster inclusive teaching environments for all.

Despite Norway’s commitment to UNESCO’s principles and the emphasis on IPC, there is a noticeable gap in Norwegian - and international - literature when it comes to addressing students’ experiences of it. This gap becomes particularly evident when considering Qvortrup and Qvortrup’s (2018) inclusion matrix, which emphasizes the experiential aspect of inclusion/exclusion. In a previous paper (Wego, n.d.), I began to address this gap by exploring how students articulate “help” and I found that students seem to have a different (and more concrete) understanding of “help” than adults. This observation has guided the direction of this paper and led to the following research question: How do primary school students make sense of their experiences of receiving help in interprofessional collaborations, with the goal of inclusive education? 

I am using participatory research and Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis [IPA] to explore the research question. IPA combines phenomenology’s emphasis on lived experiences and hermeneutics’ focus on text interpretation, seeking to explore the unique experiences of individuals and how they make sense of them (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Eatough & Smith, 2017; Smith, 2011). Critical disability studies (CDS) is thought of as a relevant theoretical framework for the discussion, considering CDS' goal towards equity and social justice (Goodley, 2007). Based on findings thus far, ableism (cf. Goodley, 2007, 2013; Titchkosky, 2012) and agency seems to be particularily relevant. For example, all of the students in the study were invited to complete three cartoon stories and take photographs of whatever they needed to learn and feel good. However, one of the students did not do any of this - instead he drew his favorite super hero, "the Flash". Instead of dismissing this as unrelevant for the study, we incorporated "The Flash" greatly in the interview and the Flash seemed to help the student reclaim agency.

My interest in studying students’ experiences with IE is influenced by both my professional and personal experiences with minority stress[1]. As a special education teacher, I have witnessed several processes that were intended to be inclusive but inadvertently resulted in exclusion. These experiences have not only shaped my understanding of the complexities involved in implementing inclusive practices but have also motivated me to delve deeper into the nuances of these processes. Through this research, I hope to contribute to the ongoing discourse on IE, and ultimately, to the improvement of educational practices for all students. 

[1] Heightened stress experienced by individuals from minority groups as a result of challenges such as prejudice and discrimination due to their deviation from the societal norms imposed by the dominant culture (Mongelli et al., 2019, p. 28)

Building on the principles of IPA (e.g., Smith, 2018) and in alignment with UNESCO’s (2009) guidelines and Qvortrup and Qvortrup’s (2018) inclusion matrix, I designed a participatory research study. Central to participatory research is the idea of participants as being precisely that: participants (O’Kane, 2008). They are not objects or informants informing the study, but rather as active contributors. By actively involving the participants, I aim to gain a deeper understanding of their unique lifeworlds (cf. Husserl, 1970, as cited in Todres et al., 2007), and how they perceive and interpret their experiences in IPC. Two fifth graders with experience from receiving help from IPC helped shape the study design. The final research design involved: • Students capturing images of anything (non-human) contributing to their well-being and learning. • Students completing three cartoon stories designed to elicit their experiences in different scenarios: one time they received help from an adult; their best day at school; their worst day at school. • Open discussions in in-depth one-on-one interviews (30-90 minutes) about the photographs, cartoon stories, and other topics of interest. Some interviews involved using cups, sticky notes, and rubber balls to help the students to visualize their beliefs and opinions. Participants were invited through professionals at their school that were involved in IPCs. A total of eight students agreed to participate, from the 3rd grade to the 7th grade. Although all participants have experience from IPCs, it is important to note that the only information I have regarding this is whatever the students told me during the interviews. This was partly to help me maintain a phenomenological attitude (cf. Finlay, 2014). Another important note is that while I momentarily categorize the phenomenon of this study as “receiving help in IPC (in Norway)”, it does not necessarily mean that the students participating in the study perceive it as such.

The students' understanding of "help" seems to be different than how adults understand "help". The students are mostly "here and now" and focused on concrete problems and immediate solutions, while the support system is designed to help with "long term" problems with abstract solutions? The problem with this is that help is not a thing that it is "out there", but part of the students' experiences. Thus, it becomes pointless to discuss help and inclusion without listening to their stories. They are not helpless, but have developed their own strategies of surviving in environments that are not designed for them, for example by imagining that they are the Flash and that they can run away from their problems when the support system fails to do so. In general, the students’ interpretations of their experiences of receiving help in IPC towards IE seems influenced by the proximity of the helpers, the attention they receive from their helpers, the perceived benefit of the help and the alignment between the helpers’ intentions and the students’ needs.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE. Eatough, V., & Smith, J. A. (2017). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. In C. Willig & W. S. Rogers (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 193–211). SAGE Publications. Finlay, L. (2014). Engaging Phenomenological Analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11(2), 121–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2013.807899 Goodley, D. (2007). Towards socially just pedagogies: Deleuzoguattarian critical disability studies. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(3), 317–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110701238769 Goodley, D. (2013). Dis/entangling critical disability studies. Disability & Society, 28(5), 631–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.717884 Kunnskapsdepartementet [the Ministry of Education and Research]. (2017). Overordnet del – verdier og prinsipper for grunnopplæringen [Core curriculum – values and principles for primary and secondary education]. Fastsatt Som Forskrift Ved Kongelig Resolusjon [as Laid down by Royal Decree]. Læreplanverket for Kunnskapsløftet 2020 [LK20]. https://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/?lang=eng Meld. St. 6 (2019-2020). Tett på – tidlig innsats og inkluderende fellesskap i barnehage, skole og SFO [Early intervention and inclusive education in kindergartens, schools and out-of-school-hours care]. Kunnskapsdepartementet [the Ministry of Education and Research]. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-6-20192020/id2677025/ Mongelli, F., Perrone, D., Balducci, J., Sacchetti, A., Ferrari, S., Mattei, G., & Galeazzi, G. M. (2019). Minority stress and mental health among LGBT populations: An update on the evidence. Minerva Psichiatrica, 60(1). https://doi.org/10.23736/S0391-1772.18.01995-7 O’Kane, C. (2008). The Development of Participatory Techniques: Facilitating Children’s Views about Decisions Which Affect Them. In P. M. Christensen & A. James (Eds.), Research with children: Perspectives and practices (2nd ed., pp. 125–155). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203964576 Qvortrup, A., & Qvortrup, L. (2018). Inclusion: Dimensions of inclusion in education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 22(7), 803–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1412506 Smith, J. A. (2011). Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Health Psychology Review, 5(1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2010.510659 Smith, J. A. (2018). “Yes It Is Phenomenological”: A Reply to Max Van Manen’s Critique of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 28(12), 1955–1958. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732318799577 The Education Act. (1998). Act relating to Primary and Secondary Education and Training. Lovdata. https://lovdata.no/dokument/NLE/lov/1998-07-17-61 Titchkosky, T. (2012). The Ends of the Body as Pedagogic Possibility. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 34(3–4), 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2012.686851 UN General Assembly. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child, 20 November 1989, United Nations. Treaty Series, 1577, 3. https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b38f0.html. UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education [Salamancaerklæringen]. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000098427 PLU8013 Helene Wego 29 UNESCO. (2009). Policy guidelines on inclusion in education. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000177849