Both Italy and England have a relatively long history of promoting the inclusion of children with special educational needs (SEN) and/or disabilities in mainstream classrooms. Italy was the first country in Europe to legislate in favour of full inclusion (Law 118/1971 and 517/1977) and England followed with the publication of the Warnock Report (DES, 1978) and the subsequent 1981 Education Act. Predicated on the principle that inclusion means full and equal participation in the life of the school (Florian, 2007; Ianes, 2005), achieving it is the result of many factors including the close collaboration between the class teacher and a range of other adults, be they professionals from the health and social services, parents, and support teachers, in Italy, and teaching assistants (TAs), in England. There are 442,700 (full-time equivalent) teachers and 345,900 support staff employed in English schools of whom 151,580 are teaching assistants, that is, a three-fold rise since 1997 (DCSF, 2009). This sizeable increase is the result of the two related but also contrasting policies of raising standards and pupil attainment, and supporting the social inclusion agenda, that is the inclusion of children with disabilities, but also of those children from disadvantaged backgrounds. TAs’ roles and responsibilities vary greatly ranging from one-to-one support for individual children, to group work, to specific support for literacy or numeracy classes. In some cases, TAs and Higher Level Teaching Assistants (HLTA) are also employed as cover teachers. In Italy there are over 70,000 support teachers whose responsibility is to work specifically with individual children and for a prescribed number of hours as specified in the child’s individual educational plan. It is worth noting that while in Italy support teachers work only with statemented children, in England TAs are expected to work with a variety of children with varying learning needs. With regard to their qualifications, in Italy disabled children are supported by ‘insegnanti di sostegno’, that is teachers with training in pedagogy, didactic psychology, and child neuropsychiatry. In England, TAs’s training and qualifications varies. Some have no specific training in the education of children, but at times with many years of experience of working with children with SEN. Since the signing of the National Agreement (DfES, 2003), which defined more clearly competencies between teachers and their assistants, TAs can now access Foundation Degrees and courses for Higher Level Teaching Assistants (HLTA). These are not compulsory and they do not lead to a national accredited qualification. This paper addresses the specific issue of support in the classroom by asking questions about the roles and responsibility, training and deployment of support teachers and TAs. Aware that there is both a dearth of systematic research on the topic and especially a lack of comparative research between educational practices in England and Italy, this paper is unique in providing a review of research evidence and comparative analysis. In doing so the paper will draw from published research and from specific studies carried out by the authors (Dettori, 2009; Devecchi, 2003, 2007, 2010). It will conclude with a set of recommendations on how to build and sustain effective classroom practices.

The data provided in this paper are drawn from research in general (Blatchford et al, 2009; Canevaro 2008; Cajkler et al, 2006; Ianes 2009; D’Alonzo 2008), but more specifically from research carried out by Devecchi (2003, 2007), and Dettori (2009). Devecchi applied an ethnographic and multi-method approach to understanding the nature and dynamics of teacher and TAs’ collaboration and supportive practices in two English secondary schools. Dettori (2009) carried out 20 semi-structured interviews with ‘insegnanti di sostegno’ (support teachers) who had been working in their roles for over five years. Both projects are innovative in seeking the views of support professionals and locating them in their daily practices. The findings from the two studies show that successful inclusion for the children depends on how TAs and support teachers are deployed and trained, but most importantly on how they are enabled to be part of a whole school approach to inclusion.

A comparison of the deployment of adult support in the classroom shows that while in both countries the notion that the inclusion of children with SEN or disabilities is a whole school process (Blatchford et al, 2009; Watkinson, 2002; Ianes, 2005), in reality practices of exclusion and marginalization of both children and adults within the classroom still exists. In too many cases, for example, support teachers and TAs work in isolation, do not plan with the classroom teacher, and do not support other children in the classroom. Their work and position within the classroom is liminal (Mansaray, 2006), at the margins of general education, accepted as a necessity, but not integrated fully in the life of the school and the classroom. As a result, the lack of inclusion of adults reflects on the difficulties to achieve the inclusion for the children (Devecchi, 2007). Based on our findings, the authors recommend a more systematic approach to research on the topic and a more concerted policy effort in recognizing and valuing the work of all adults in the classroom.