Over the years, various approaches to addressing what teachers need to know and how they should be taught to address differences between learners have been promoted. With traditional in-service training proving ineffective, there's been a push for alternative methods of professional development (PD) (UNESCO, 2020). Effective PD, as suggested, should be school-based, collaborative, embedded in teachers' daily routines, and offer follow-up support (Bull & Buechler, 1997). This has led to the development of different forms of collaborative PD, including frequently used action research (Waitoller & Artiles, 2013). Action research, especially collaborative action research (CAR), has shown promise in enhancing teachers' sense of agency, redefining professional roles, and fostering competencies (Angelides et al., 2008; Jovanović et al., 2017). So, how come many teachers still report feeling unprepared or lacking confidence in addressing learning differences (Cochran-Smith et al., 2016), despite the promise and widespread implementation of CAR? We aim to present a cross-case analysis of CAR in six primary and secondary schools in Serbia. The analysis explores how teachers and researchers perceive their learning through CAR, while also identifying system-level barriers to CAR as a PD. Since May 2022, researchers and school practitioners in six schools in Serbia have collaborated to develop inclusive practices and foster inclusive school communities. They've utilised a CAR design involving planning, acting, observing, reflecting, and revising (Zuber-Skerritt, 1996). The planning phase included a two-day workshop devoted to situation analysis, problem definition, and collaborative planning of action research. The acting and observing stage is followed by joint reflection on the process and outcomes of CAR. The reflection process is further supported through communities of practice, which engaged participants from all six schools. Six case studies, one from each school, will be prepared using various data sources - focus group discussions with school practitioners and researchers, research products (e.g., research plans), and written communication between practitioners and researchers. The cross-case analysis will be approached inductively using reflexive thematic analysis. The findings will be discussed from a systemic perspective (Senge, 2020), attempting to identify patterns, system structures, and underlying beliefs that hinder the use of CAR as a tool for strengthening teachers’ competencies for inclusive education. The work is part of the project “Enhanced Equal Access to and Completion of Pre-University Education for Children in Need of Additional Support in Education” implemented by UNICEF Serbia and Ministry of Education of the Republic of Serbia, supported by the Delegation of EU.

Angelides, P., Georgiou, R., & Kyriakou, K. (2008). The implementation of a collaborative action research programme for developing inclusive practices: social learning in small internal networks. Educational Action Research, 16(4), 557–568. Bull, B., & Buechler, B. (1997). Planning together: Professional development for teachers of all students. Indiana Education Policy Center. Cochran-Smith, M., A. M. Villegas, L. Abrams, L. Chavez-Moreno, T. Mills, & R. Stern (2016). Research on Teacher Preparation: Charting the Landscape of a Sprawling Field. In D. Gitomer & C. Bell (eds.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp. 439–546). AERA. Jovanović, O., Plazinić, L., Joksimović, J., Komlenac, J., & Pešikan, A. (2017). Developing the early warning system for identification of students at risk of dropping out using a collaborative action research process. Psihološka istraživanja, 20(1), 107-125. https://doi.org/10.5937/PsIstra1701107J Senge, P. (2020). Commentary: Why practicing a system’s perspective is easier said than done. Applied Developmental Science, 24(1), 57–61. UNESCO (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report. Inclusive teaching: preparing all teachers to teach all students. Available at: Waitoller, F. R., & Artiles, A. J. (2013). A Decade of Professional Development Research for Inclusive Education: A Critical Review and Notes for a Research Program. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 319-356.