Despite inclusive education having been high on the education agenda since the publishing of the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO 1994), we are still in need of better theories on how more inclusive practices can be created in school communities (Nilholm, 2021, p.367). UNESCO (2020) emphasizes youth and children’s rights and states that students’ participation and co-creation should be prioritized to make desirable changes in the future of education (p.6). This is especially important as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) emphasizes children’s right to express themselves (article 13) and be heard on all matters that affect them (article 12). Adderley et al. (2015) note that the students’ main interest in school may not even be what occurs in the classroom (p.111). Therefore, it is important to acknowledge students as co-creators in research on inclusive practices in school. Messiou & Lowe (2023) argue that children need to be given impact through collaborative action research to promote inclusion in school (p.1). As teachers hold a central role regarding students' experiences of inclusion in everyday school life, their reflections and strategies can provide valuable insight into inclusive practices as well (Nilholm, 2021, p.366).  

In this paper we present a study conducted in a Norwegian public primary school characterized by a diverse student body, both in terms of ethnicity, religion, culture, language, family background and learning needs. This is a sub-study of a larger project that is part of a school-university partnership, where the overarching aim is to gain new insight into inclusion and inclusive practices through co-creation between researchers, students, and teachers. In this study, our understanding of co-creation is defined as a process through which two or more actors are involved in a cross-cutting and ideally equal collaboration with a view to create new and better solutions to shared problems and challenges (Krogh et al., 2020, p.52). While a previous sub-study has explored inclusion through students' voices in formal teacher-student conversations (Uthus & Aas, 2024), this study explores what is important to students regarding inclusion both in terms of their general well-being and learning processes in school. This study also explores how their teacher reflects and acts upon the students’ voices. The research question is formulated as follows: 

What are students concerned with when it comes to inclusive education and what reflections does their teacher have regarding her own role in developing inclusive practices in school based on their voices? 

Messiou et al. (2024) argue that dialogue and collaboration between students and teachers can contribute to developing inclusive practices, thusly addressing an existing gap between the rhetoric and the practice of inclusion in schools (p.11-12). Lundy (2007) argues that student voices not only have to be heard, but that their right to be heard (UN 1989, article 12) also implies a larger obligation in educational decision making (p.930). Lundy (2007) emphasizes four key elements in educational decision making: space, where children are given the opportunity to express themselves; voice, where the children must be facilitated to express their views; audience, that describes that someone must listen to those views; and influence, meaning those views must be acted upon as appropriate (p.933). This understanding is also in line with Tangen (2008), who suggests that listening refers to a mutual process of communication that involves hearing, interpreting, and constructing meaning, and therefore is both contextual and interactional (p.159). This study is based on the belief that students may offer valuable insight into inclusion in school, and that their teacher may be a valuable facilitator for both space, voice, audience and influence regarding the development of inclusive practices in everyday school life. 

This is a participatory research study (Vaughn & Jacquez, 2020, p.1) where five students from senior elementary school and their teacher participated. The teacher had been recruited through the school-university partnership and the students were recruited through their teacher. Participation was based on informed ongoing consent. In addition to parental consent, the students were asked at every step of the research process if they still wanted to participate. They were also reminded of their right to stop participation, or withdraw any information they might have given, at any time. Step one in the research process was a preparational meeting, which served as a co-operational brainstorm. In the preparational meeting, the students emphasized that the researchers needed to talk to the students and let their voices be heard. The students also wanted researchers to talk to teachers. Based on the students’ reflections, step two became a focus group interview (Wilkinson, 2004, p.177) with the students and their teacher. For the focus group interview, the first author prepared in total seven follow-up questions based on the topics the students had addressed as important to them regarding inclusion in the preparational meeting. Three follow-up questions regarded friendship, and four follow-up questions regarded social media. In step three, the first author conducted a stimulated recall-interview (Zhai et al., 2024, p.1) with the teacher that had participated in the focus group interview. Listening to the students’ discussions and reflections from the focus group interview served as a foundation to explore how student voices impacted the teacher’s reflections on inclusive practices in school in general, as well as her own role in developing inclusive practices. No specific questions were prepared for the recall interview as the intention was to listen to the students’ voices openly and reflect upon what they addressed as important. The teacher and first author stopped the recording and reflected whenever they wanted to discuss the students’ statements in depth. In total 64 minutes recording from the focus group interview and 195 minutes recording from the recall interview were transcribed, inductively coded and categorized. Preliminary categories that have emerged so far are friendship, social media, gender, justice, classroom environment and guidance skills.

In line with the findings of Adderley et al. (2015), students address topics that extend beyond what occurs in the classroom (p.111), but that are linked to their wellbeing and feelings of inclusion or exclusion at school. For instance, the students address the impact of what happens on social media outside school on their wellbeing at school, providing both positive and negative examples. They also address the impact of group divisions at school, as well as challenges related to friendships among students of the opposite gender. In a Norwegian context, recent research indicates that gender can play a vital role when it comes to feelings of exclusion and social pressure in senior secondary school (Wendelborg et al., 2025). However, less is known about whether younger students experience similar challenges related to gender. The findings of this study might contribute to gaining some insight into younger students’ experiences on the subject. The teacher seems sometimes surprised by what the students are concerned with, which leads to her having new perspectives on classroom environment, group division, gender division, and justice in the classroom. The study’s findings suggest that the teacher might function as a knowledgeable guide for both students and parents since she has a unique insight into students’ dynamics as individuals in a larger community. Furthermore, the teacher seems to gain insight into students’ use of social media and their experiences of exclusion regarding gender roles in the school community, that parents might not. The teacher expresses that she gained new perspectives based on the student voices regarding her own role in promoting inclusive practices. As this seems to echo Lundy’s (2007) emphasis on influence as part of teachers' competence for student participation, we will explore this in further analyses, both considering Lundy and other relevant research in the field.

Adderley, R.J., Hope, M.A., Hughes, G.C., Jones, L., Messiou, K. & Shaw, P.A. (2015). Exploring inclusive practices in primary schools: focusing on children’s voices. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 30(1), 106-121. Krogh, A.H., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2020). Samskabelse af innovative offentlige løsninger. In (ed.) E. Willumsen & A. Ødegård, Samskaping. Sosial innovasjon for helse og velferd (p.45-65). Universitetsforlaget. Lundy, Laura (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., & Lowe, A. (2023). Developing student-researchers in primary schools through inclusive inquiry. Educational Action Research, 1-16.  Messiou, K., de los Reyes, J., Potnis, C., Dong, P., & Rwang, V. K. (2024). Student voice for promoting inclusion in primary schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–15. Nilholm, C. (2021). Research about inclusive education in 2020 – How can we improve our theories in order to change practice? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 36(3), 358-370. Tangen, R. (2008). Listening to children’s voices in educational research: some theoretical and methodological problems. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 23(2), 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250801945956   UN General Assembly. Convention on the Rights of the Child. 20. November 20, 1989. UNESCO. 2020. Education in a Post-Covid World: Nine Ideas for Public Action. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Paris: UNESCO. Uthus, M., & Aas, H. K. (2024). Inclusion explored through student voices within the framework of formal teacher-student conversations. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2024.2349955   Vaughn, L. M., & Jacquez, F. (2020). Participatory Research Methods – Choice Points in the Research Process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.13244   Wendelborg, C., Hygen, B. W., Mordal, S., Tangen, S. & Buland, T (2024). En skolehverdag under press: Jakten på trygghet og tilhørighet. Dypdykk om videregående elevers opplevelse av et trygt skolemiljø og tilhørighet i skolen. NTNU Samfunnsforskning AS. Wilkinson, S. (2004). “Focus group research». In D. Silverman (Ed.) Qualitative Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 177-199. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Zhai, X., Chu, X., Wang, M. et al. (2024). A systematic review of Stimulated Recall (SR) in educational research from 2012 to 2022. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11, 489 (2024).