Teachers are faced with major challenges when considering recent development needs of schools and education. In particular, inclusion and digitalisation can be identified as key developments (Filk/Schaumburg, 2021). Although they are often considered independently from one another, they can also be seen as closely related elements of a new school culture (Schulz, 2023). In this discourse, the claim of inclusive schools to create equal learning opportunities for all students while actively regarding their heterogeneity (Werning, 2020) and the claim to teach students media skills while also embedding digital formats in the lessons themselves are discussed in terms of their synergistic effects (Schulz, 2023). In this complex field of tension, teachers are faced with comprehensive competence requirements regarding their lesson design. As new teaching practices cannot simply mean the transfer of analogue media into digital formats (Gervé et al., 2023), there is a requirement for changing roles of teachers. This dissertation project asks about the processes of subjectivation of teachers on the basis of the complex field of inclusive development and the ongoing implementation of digital media in schools. The aim is to reconstruct actual classroom practices within this field, showing how digital media are (not) used and how this influences the position of teachers within the classes. By this I want to highlight opportunities and challenges for inclusive teaching with digital media.

The entry of digital media into the spheres of education is leading to significant changes in social realities for all affected actors. In this process, various factors can take on new meanings (Proske et al., 2023), such as social backgrounds in regards to a digital expertise (Hilbert, 2015). This raises the question of how the subjectivation of teachers changes regarding inclusive settings with digital media, as they have to act within a complex field of changes and requirements. While efforts to improve the digital infrastructure in German schools have been underway for some time, the solutions vary widely, for example in the form of tablet pools in schools or individual student devices. Studies show that the digital equipment of German schools is certainly improving and that teachers are increasingly using it (Lorenz et al., 2022). Nonetheless it must be emphasised, that inclusive teaching, in the sense of a broad understanding of inclusion (Werning, 2020), needs to be particularly aware of diverse lines of difference, that might influence learning. Teachers’ and students’ skills in using digital media are diverse and multifaceted and the actual implementation of media remains largely dependent on the respective individual teachers (Engel/Jörissen 2022). Even though digital media are being used more and more, the teaching processes are, so far, only changing gradually and always within the framework of an existing pedagogical order (Proske et al., 2023). Examples are the need for regulation of students’ use of digital media (Rabenstein et al., 2022) or an increase in self-regulated learning (Stinken-Rösner/Abels, 2021).

When asking about changes in this complex field, subject-teachers that are already confronted with especially challenging settings come to mind. Science classes can be emphasised as particularly challenging, as they are, for example, already very materially complex (Stinken-Rösner/Abels, 2021). The consideration of the students heterogeneity in this context comes as a challenge, as complex tasks might overwhelm students (ibid.), and as an opportunity, as the activity-oriented and group-based teaching methods can promote inclusive lesson designs (Minner et al., 2010).

This dissertations question is approached with a qualitative research design. Ethnographic observations and interviews are analysed using coding procedures of the Grounded Theory (Strauss/Corbin, 2010). The research follows a praxeological perspective (Schatzki, 2012), which allows for a comprehensive focus on digital media in social practices.

For the data collection an ethnographic approach was chosen. Lesson observations are carried out in eight different classes. Usually with two teachers each, and over a number of lessons respectively. Additionally interviews with teachers as well as students are conducted and transcribed. The data analysis is based on the Grounded Theory Methodology (Strauss/Corbin, 2010) and allows for the identification of relevant actors and practices as well as their interrelations, using coding procedures. The projects praxeological view on social realities (Schatzki, 2012) identifies all social phenomena as bundlings of practices. In and through practice, human actors are constantly positioned as specific subjects in relation to other actors. In this context materiality, knowledge, routines, transformation, norms and (digital) mediality are of highlighted importance. All practice is performed materially and consists of human bodies (and therefore the ability of humans to move their bodies in specific ways to perform practice), and material artefacts (describing all possible objects). Both human and non-human actors influence social practice equally. Performing practice relies on specific knowledge on how to do so, for example the knowledge on how to use a specific artefact. However, as practice is never consistent, it always is open for failure and reinterpretation. It is therefore characterised by routine as well as change. The specific practices with artefacts transform them (Röhl, 2015), as a tablet will only become an artefact of teaching and learning through according practice. This is highly reliant on normative expectations regarding the actors’ practices. For example the norm to have specific skills in a specific role, such as a teacher. Digital mediality in this context is understood as a specific form of materiality. Mediality describes the manifestation of symbols in practice (Bettinger, 2022). As practice is constantly changing, the meaning of such symbols changes as well. A digital mediality makes digital information perceptible through material devices (Engel/Jörissen, 2022) such as Speakers or Screens. In this complex interplay of social practice, subjectivation takes place. Human actors emerge as specific subjects in relation to others through verbal adressings and positionings in the room. The complexity of digital mediality allows new and different forms of subjectivation. As an example the use of smart-boards in classes allows for new ways of presenting contents. They way teachers and students use this or adress each other regarding the use of such media will lead to specific subjectivations such as digital experts or newcomers.

This research project focuses on the subjectivation of teachers in inclusive science classes with digital media. The ongoing analysis has, so far, identified a number of different forms of subjectivation of teachers in relation to digital media. These have shown specific artefacts, such as tablets, laptops and beamers as highly important artefacts in this regard. Teachers’ subjectivation has been shown to be strongly related to different but interrelated core topics: Firstly, the responsibility for securing of a specific temporality of the lessons shows to be switching back and forth between teachers and students whereby digital media can have a central role. They might for example highlight specific phases of teaching. Secondly, the teachers handle the question of authorisation regarding the use of digital media (in a sense of limitations as well as requests) in different ways. As in some cases they would leave it up to the students whether or in what way they want to integrate digital media in their work, while in other cases they would strictly bind this to specific tasks. Thirdly, the meaning of digital expertise shows to be central regarding the roles of actors within the classes, as teachers might, for example, instruct students to prepare and operate digital media while they themselves keep leading the lesson on a content level. These specific uses of digital media subjectivate teachers in specific ways. At ECER 2025, I want to present those exemplary findings on a case basis highlighting how differently science teaching is performed by different teachers in otherwise very similar settings, showing different forms of subjectivation. I want to discuss this concerning the requirements of inclusive developments as well as digitalisation of schools.

Bettinger, P. (2022). Educational Perspectives on Mediality and Subjectivation: Discourse, Power and Analysis. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84343-4 Engel, J./Jörissen, B. (2022). Schule und Medialität. In: T.Hascher/T.S.Idel/W.Helsper (ed.): Handbuch Schulforschung (1-21). Springer VS. Filk, C./Schaumburg, H. (2021). Editorial: Inklusiv-mediale Bildung und Fortbildung in schulischen Kontexten. MedienPädagogik (41), i–viii. Gervé, F./Peschel, M./Haider, M./Gryl, I./Schmeinck, D./Brämer, M. (2023). Herausforderungen und Zukunftsperspektiven eines Sachunterrichts mit und über Medien. In D. Schmeinck, K. Michalik/T. Goll (Eds.). Herausforderungen und Zukunfts-perspektiven für den Sachunterricht. Verlag Julius Klinkhardt. Hilbert, M. (2015). Digital Divide(s). In P. H. Ang, R. Mansell & A. P. Hwa (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of digital communication and society (1-7). Wiley Blackwell. Lorenz, R./Yotyodying, S./Eickelmann, B./Endberg, M. (Eds.) (2022). Schule digital – der Länderindikator 2021. Lehren und Lernen mit digitalen Medien in der Sekundarstufe I in Deutschland im Bundesländervergleich und im Trend seit 2017. Waxmann. https://doi.org/10.31244/9783830995449 Minner, D. D./Levy, A. J./Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction – What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20347 Proske, M./Rabenstein, K./Moldenhauer, A./Thiersch, S./Bock, A./Herrle, M./Hoffmann, M./Langer, A./Macgilchrist, F./Wagener-Böck, N./Wolf, E. (Eds.) (2023). Schule und Unterricht im digitalen Wandel. Ansätze und Erträge rekonstruktiver Forschung. Verlag Julius Klinkhardt. DOI: 10.25656/01:26256 Rabenstein, K./Macgilchrist, F./Wagener-Böck, N./Bock, A. (2022). Lernkultur im digitalen Wandel. Methodologische Weichenstellungen einer ethnographischen Fallstudie. In S. Münte-Goussar/C. Kuttner/C. Schätzle/Y. Kolesnykova (Eds.), Praxistheoretische Perspektiven auf Schule in der Kultur der Digitalität (179-196). Springer VS. Röhl, T. (2015). Transsituating education. Educational artefacts in the classroom and beyond. In M. Bollig/M.-S. Honig/S. Neumann/C. Seele (Eds.), MultiPluriTrans. Approaching the multimodality, plurality and translocality of educational realities (121-140). transcript. Schatzki, T. R. (2012). A Primer On Practices: Theory and Research. In J. Higgs/R. Barnett/S. Billett/M. Hutchings/F. Trede (Eds.), Practice-based education: Perspectives and strategies (13-26). Sense Publisher. Schulz, L. (2023). Diklusion in der Lehrkräftebildung - ein Praxisbericht. In D. Ferencik-Lehmkuhl/I. Huynh/C. Laubmeister/C. Lee/C. Melzer/I. Schwank/H. Weck/ K. Ziemen (Eds.), Inklusion digital! Chancen und Herausforderungen inklusiver Bildung im Kontext von Digitalisierung (51-65). Verlag Julius Klinkhardt. Stinken-Rösner L./Abels, S. (2021). Digitale Medien als Mittler im Spannungsfeld zwischen naturwissenschaftlichem Unterricht und inklusiver Pädagogik. In S. Hundertmark/X. Sun/S. Abels/A. Nehring/R. Schildknecht/V. Seremet/C. Lindmeier (Eds.), Naturwissenschaftsdidaktik und Inklusion. Beiheft zur Zeitschrift "Sonderpädagogische Förderung heute". Vol 4. 1st ed (161-175). Beltz. Strauss, A.L./Corbin, J. (2010). Grounded Theory: Grundlagen Qualitativer Sozialforschung. Beltz. Werning, R. (2020). Inklusive Didaktik - adaptiven Unterricht realisieren. Schule inklusiv, 8, 4-8.