Since the 1994 UNESCO conference in Salamanca (1994), inclusive education has been high on the international education agenda. Research in the field has largely focused on theoretical aspects and top-down studies with inclusion defined in advance through state or municipal programs (Chapman & Ainscow, 2021). Because of this, exploring inclusive practices from the bottom up in local contexts is a potentially valuable approach (Chapman & Ainscow, 2021). This kind of school-based research, particularly including the voices of students themselves (Messiou, 2019a), holds promise for development of inclusive practices (Messiou & Ainscow, 2015; Messiou, 2019b). If teachers should systematically and consistently support every child’s right to express themselves and have their views given due weight in all matters affecting them (United Nations, 1989), then teachers must facilitate students’ opportunities to express their voice, have the skills to actively listen to the students, and then act appropriately, according to the students’ views (Lundy, 2007). Messiou (2006) explains that dialogues between teachers and their students are a manifestation of being inclusive, defining such dialogues as ‘reciprocal interactions between participants that lead to authentic engagement with each other’s views, creating new meanings and further questions’ (Messiou, 2019c).

Studies involving the views of students have been largely absent from the literature (Messiou & Ainscow, 2015). Students’ voices can be an important element if teachers are to reflect on how they can be more responsive to learner diversity and improve their inclusive practice (Messiou & Ainscow, 2015; Messiou, 2019b). For this is to be realised, teachers need to develop their ability to and skills for facilitating students expressing their voices, and it must be possible for them to act on the basis of student views (Lundy, 2007). This is not necessarily a straightforward process—according to the theory of ‘cognitive dissonance’ (Festinger, 1957), for instances, teachers might experience discomfort due to a discrepancy between their ideal practices and what they achieve or fail to achieve in their work. According to Treacy and Leavy (2023), however, this is merely an inevitable step in the process of positive teacher change.

In this paper we present a study conducted in a Norwegian public primary school characterised by student diversity in terms of ethnicity, religion, culture, language, family background, and learning needs. The aim of the study was to gain new understanding of teacher experiences with listening to students’ voices regarding inclusion. The participating teachers, together with the researchers, developed a framework for the school’s formal one-on-one teacher-student conversations in which the students were asked to share their experiences of inclusion and exclusion in everyday school life. Data in this study consist of teacher reflections on these conversations. The research question was formulated as follows:  

What reflective response do three teachers have about their role and practices after engaging in conversations with students about their experiences of inclusion?

The idea for the study arose from a larger project at the participating school, in which all staff were asked to write about what inclusion meant to them. Analyses showed that the staff emphasised inclusion as a psychological experience (a ‘sense of belonging’) which was further divided into dimensions of 1) a sense of relatedness to peers and teachers, 2) a sense of mastering learning activities, 3) a sense of mattering, and 4) a sense of agency (Uthus & Sivertsen, 2023). Based on this, the researchers and staff together developed a framework for the school’s formal teacher-student conversation (TSC)* consisting of open-ended questions according to the four dimensions. Three teachers and 15 students in 3rd and 7th grade were voluntarily recruited from the participating school. After carrying out and recording five TSCs each, the teachers were asked to listen to the recordings and freely select sequences that supported their recall of their reflections in the situation, additionally inspiring shared reflections on the situation. The teachers then met to reflect, with one researcher attending (three meetings; six hours altogether). To treat the teachers as experts on their own reflections and encourage their development of a shared language (Huberman, 1993), they were asked to freely comment both during and after the listening sequences. The researcher posed open questions or asked for clarifications when needed and offered reflections when any teacher asked for them. Data in this study are transcripts of audio recordings from these meetings. To analyse the transcriptions, we chose a collective and inductive approach. Firstly, the researchers individually went through the transcripts to identify preliminary themes, then met to share notes with each other. During the analysis of key themes and underlying codes and categories, we kept working individually and met on several occasions to sort and discuss emerging results. (* In Norway teachers are required by the Education Act (1998, § 3.7) to conduct formal one-on-one teacher-student conversations twice each year, focusing on the student’s well-being and learning in school. Exactly what the conversation should contain is up to each school or municipality to decide.)

Our analyses resulted in the following categories: 1) Inclusion experiences in student meetings, 2) Barriers of time and capacity, and 3) Costs of discovering that one’s own practices aren’t in the students' best interests. The first category highlights the teachers’ reflections on the value their active listening and acknowledging of students' personal experiences have for students, and the teachers’ reflections on how inclusion occurred in the conversations. The second category regards the teachers’ reflections on how increased awareness about the value of such conversations paradoxically burdens them, given the limited time and capacity they have, for listening to their students, addressing students’ challenges, and following up on students’ concerns and wishes. The third category illustrates how the teachers, through the conversations, are confronted with discrepancies between their ideal practices and actual actions. This was often related to the teachers’ accountability to a school system emphasizing academic achievement. Student voices appears to be a valuable starting point for creating more inclusive practices (Messiou, 2006), encouraging teachers to reflect on how to be more responsive to learner diversity and improve their inclusive practice (Messiou & Ainscow, 2015; Messiou, 2019b). However, the results of this study indicate that listening to students voices also implies challenges essential for teachers to acknowledge and address. The participating teachers experienced the conversations as valuable both for themselves and the students, but also as painful because they gained insights into how practices—both their own as well as the school’s—could potentially harm the students. Some of these insights were within the teachers’ power to act upon; others were not. Our findings illustrate how experiences of inclusion are intertwined not only with teachers' commitments and practices, but also local school conditions, political influences, and broader educational values.

Chapman, C., & Ainscow, M. (2021). Educational Equity: Pathways to Success. Routledge. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press. Huberman, M. (1993). The model of the independent artisan in teachers' professional relationships.In J. W. Little, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), Teachers' Work: Individuals, colleagues and contexts. Teachers College Press. Lundy, L. (2007). ‘Voice’ is not enough: conceptualising Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. British educational research journal, 33(6), 927-942. Messiou, K. (2006). Understanding marginalisation in education: The voice of children. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21(3), 305-318 Messiou, K. (2019a). Collaborative action research: facilitating inclusion in schools. Educational Action Research, 27(2), 197-209. Messiou, K. (2019b). The missing voices: students as a catalyst for promoting inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(7-8), 768-781. Messiou, K. (2019c). Understanding marginalisation through dialogue: a strategy for promoting the inclusion of all students in schools. Educational Review, 71(3), 306-317. Messiou, K., & Ainscow, M. (2015). Responding to learner diversity: Student views as a catalyst for powerful teacher development? Teaching and teacher education, 51, 246-255. Treacy, M., & Leavy, A. (2023). Student voice and its role in creating dissonance: the neglected narrative in teacher professional development. Professional Development in Education, 49(3), 458-477. UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. United Nations (1989). The UN convention on the rights of the child. UN. Uthus, M., & Sivertsen, K. I. (2023). Samskapt kunnskapsutvikling om inkludering i en mangfoldig skole – med eleven i sentrum. [Co created knowledge development on inclusion in a heterogeneous school - with the student in the center.] I A. B. Emstad (Ed.), Samskapt kunnskapsutvikling i skole og lærerutdanning. Der praksis og forskning møtes [ Co created knowledge development i schools and teacher education. Where practice and research meet.] (pp. 180—199). Universitetsforlaget.