One of the requirements for successful inclusion of pupils with SEN in mainstream education is lower class sizes and sufficient teaching staff, including teaching assistants (Kerins et al., 2017; Wren, 2017). Without questioning the benefits of this measure, we shift the focus to the didactic principles that contribute to creating a pro-inclusive environment. Research shows that there is a close relationship between the didactic methods used and the results of implementing inclusion (Rodríguez-Oramas et al., 2021; Martos-García & Monforte, 2019). In general, frontal methods that emphasize supervision, control and obedience are less able to work with inclusion, and conversely, strongly activating and socializing educational practices have a relatively high potential to promote collaborative learning for all children (Arrow et al., 2022). Such didactic principles are immanent in Step by Step (SbS).

SbS is an internationally expanded curriculum focused on early childhood and primary education. At the core of the program is an emphasis on democratic values, on the cooperation and self-reflection of all actors in education, on the intensive participation of parents and on the development of teachers' competences. SbS is strongly inspired by the Head Start (HS) program as one of the important tools of early childhood education (ECE), through which the US federal government has been trying to combat the social reproduction of poverty since the 1960s (Vinovsky, 2005). During the 1990s, the creation of the SbS program was supported by the Open Society Foundations (founded by G. Soros). The aim was to promote changes in early childhood education, especially to promote child-centred approaches and democratic values in Central and Eastern Europe and the countries of the former Soviet Union. In 1999, the umbrella International Step by Step Association (ISSA) was established, which has grown over the years into the most important network for early childhood education in Europe and Central Asia. It now promotes quality, equity and inclusiveness in the education of children from birth to 10 years of age.

In this presentation, we present the results of three years of research on the Step by Step (SbS) program in the Czech Republic, which operates here under the name Start Together (ST). In this paper, we want to evaluate what skills and abilities pupils develop in the SbS program in the Czech Republic. We will show that pupils achieve better results in creative and metacognitive skills. The aim of the research, however, was not to detect individual sub-skills developed in SbS, but to understand the complex phenomenon by which the quality of teaching is affected. In the research we detected the so-called Emotional-Cognitive Infrastructure (ECI). ECI has been detected in SbS research, however, it has a more general character that goes beyond the horizon of this program. It describes the organization of the learning environment and the processes taking place in it.

Although SbS is the most widespread alternative educational approach in the Czech Republic, similar to the international context, very little peer-reviewed research has been conducted evaluating the effectiveness of the program. To begin to fill this gap in knowledge at least partially, we formulated the following research questions:

• What life-applicable skills and abilities in children are strengthened and developed by the SbS teaching approach?
• In what ways does the SbS program develop these skills in pupils?

To answer the research questions in a more plastic way, our research design consisted of several distinct components: an analysis of the National Survey of Pupil Achievement, quantitative research conducted in SbS classes, and qualitative research conducted in SbS classes.

Quantitative part of the research Within this phase, we used a questionnaire and test methods to investigate so-called soft skills. Generally, these skills, which are encouraged in pupils and supported by the SbS program, contribute to their development and long-term use of knowledge. Our investigation was thematically focused on measuring pupils’ self-concept, classroom climate, pupils’ emotional competencies, and their creative and metacognitive skills. We collected data in Year 4 and Year 5 classes, i.e., classes nearing the end of the SbS program with pupils who were highly likely to be impacted by it. In addition, pupils at this age were able to participate in completing test methods that would have been inappropriate for younger children. Data collection was conducted by group administration and lasted approximately three class periods. The researchers entered each classroom twice (on two different days) to ensure that the pupils were not exhausted by working on the questionnaire and test methods. In total, 517 pupils from 27 classes in 11 schools across the country were involved in the research, which represents 15% of the total number of primary schools teaching in the first cycle of the SbS program. Qualitative part of the research In the process of data collection and analysis, we drew on an ethnographic approach (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2005) that emphasizes field research. School ethnography was conducted in two primary schools in two different Czech cities, both schools with a long tradition of SbS classes. The data include: • information from 13 different classes from first to fifth grade • 60 hours of participant observation in classrooms • 15 hours of interviews with key stakeholders – teachers and school management • an expert focus group The aim of this part of the research was to observe the development of systemic elements of teaching in the SbS program based on an analysis of real classroom events in order to locate structural connections between the observed interactions and the effectiveness of the teaching system by comparing data analysis from different grades. This entailed tracing the principles, pitfalls, and implications of building a primary infrastructure through which the SbS program was able to form a community of learners. For the data analysis phase, we used methods of situational analysis, which emphasizes the systematic capture of relationships that influence the particular forms of the environment under study (Clarke, 2005; Clarke, Friesse, & Washburn, 2015).

A key outcome that describes very well the structural benefits of SbS education, yet goes beyond the context of SbS and can be applied to the evaluation of different learning environments, is the concept of Emotional-Cognitive Infrastructure (ECI). We distinguished four interrelated levels of ECI building in school settings. In the first stage, named instrumental, its building, technical elements play the main role, mainly setting rules, structuring the day, working with time and space. At the next level, called didactic, elements such as teaching through questions, reflection, and activating forms of teaching appear. These are elements through which the teaching environment is didactically modified and the content is didactically transformed. Only after this level has been built up can the third level, called autonomization level, be developed, in which some of the more complex elements characterizing the teaching process already play a significant role. These are the elements of differentiation and individualization of teaching, responsibility and autonomy of pupils, etc. A characteristic component of this level is the process of transition from guided to autonomous learning. The fourth level, called constructivist, is characterized by a specific complexity that permeates all processes and shapes the atmosphere of the classroom, which is manifested by the teacher's calmness, the students' confidence in their own teaching abilities and the joy of discovery. The term SEN industry (Tomlinson, 2017) explains how efforts to help pupils with SEN can turn into the opposite of what is intended. Instead of these pupils experiencing a seamless integration into the school classroom, the boundaries between them and so-called normal children become more pronounced. We show that teaching at an autonomy and constructivist level allows pupils with SEN to be naturally supported in the classroom environment and thus contributes to reducing the negative phenomena associated with the SEN industry.

•Clarke, A. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousands Oak, London, New Delhi: SAGE Publications. •Clarke, A., Friesse, C. & Washburn, R. (2015). Situational analysis in practice: mapping research with grounded theory. Walnut Creek (CA): Left Coast Press. •Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (2005). Ethnography. Principles and practice. (3ed ed.). London, New York: Routledge. •Kerins, P., Casserly, A. M., Deacy, E., Harvey, D., McDonagh, D., & Tiernan, B. (2017) The professional development needs of special needs assistants in Irish post-primary schools, European Journal of Special Needs Education, 33, 31-46, doi: 10.1080/08856257.2017.1297572. •Martos-García D., Monforte J. (2019). ‘Haz lo que puedas’. Un estudio de caso sobre diversidad funcional y Educación Física. Ágora para la Educación Física y el Deporte, 21, 52–73. •Rodríguez-Oramas, A., Alvarez, P., Ramis-Salas, Ruiz-Eugenio, L. (2021). The Impact of Evidence-Based Dialogic Training of Special Education Teachers on the Creation of More Inclusive and Interactive Learning Environments. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.641426 •Šíp, R. et al. (2022). Na cestě k inkluzivní škole. Interakce a norma. Brno: Masarykova univerzita. •Tomlinson, S. (2017). A Sociology of Special and Inclusive Education. Exploring the Manufacture of Inability. Abingdon: Routledge. •Vinovsky, M. A. (2005). The Birth of Head Start. Preschool Education Policies in the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. •Wren, A. (2017). Understanding the role of the teaching assistant: Comparing the views of pupils with SEN and TAs within mainstream primary schools, Support for Learning 32(1), 4-19. doi: 10.1111/1467-9604.12151