The implementation of an inclusive education system has been extensively discussed within educational research all over Europe in recent years. The discourse is grounded in empirical findings that highlight the benefits of inclusive education for fostering equality and social participation (Finkelstein et al., 2021). Research also underscores the structural, organizational, and interpersonal challenges associated with translating inclusive principles into practice (Lütje-Klose & Urban, 2014). One particularly pressing issue in this context concerns the need for effective collaboration between regular teachers and special education teachers, as joint efforts have been identified as a key factor for successful inclusion (Grosche et al., 2020; Grosche & Moser-Opitz, 2023; Paulsrud & Nieholm, 2023).

However, a look at the current implementation of collaboration in Germany, and more specifically North Rhine-Westphalia, reveals a number of obstacles. On the one hand, it can be seen that in many schools, collaboration is not (yet) being practiced. This is particularly evident in secondary schools, while more successful collaborative relationships are being reported in elementary schools. On the other hand, there is greater reliance on forms of collaboration that are less timeconsuming and require little to no shared goals (Grosche & Moser-Opitz, 2023; Richter & Pant, 2016).

Still, current research indicates that teacher collaboration can be a challenging issue, potentially due to a lack of consensus on which goals should be prioritized. For instance, discrepancies exist in how teachers perceive their responsibilities for specific tasks and in the roles they prefer to assume within collaborative settings (Grosche & Moser-Opitz, 2023; Paulsrud & Nilholm, 2020). Moreover, there is evidence suggesting that special education teachers often feel undervalued compared to their regular teaching partners (Grosche et al., 2020). These challenges are further underlined by findings indicating that teachers frequently do not pursue shared goals in their collaboration, which may come from differing professional roles, expectations, or perspectives on inclusion (Urton et al., 2023; Vangrieken et al., 2016). The importance of shared goals in collaborative processes has been demonstrated across various contexts, including the pedagogical one (Fewster-Thuente, 2015; Mulvale et al., 2016). The efforts of individual team members toward a shared goal represent the central processes through which activities are coordinated, enabling collaborative work on the task at hand (Driskell et al., 2018).

Against the background of the presented state of research, it can be assumed that teachers find it difficult to implement intensive forms of collaboration based on shared goals. Given that effective collaboration is considered essential for fostering inclusive education, this misalignment regarding shared goals represents a significant barrier (Moser-Opitz et al., 2021).

Even though a lot of research exists on the topic of teacher collaboration (e.g., Grosche et al., 2020; Lütje-Klose & Urban, 2014; Moser-Opitz et al., 2021; Richter & Pant, 2016), the development of shared goals and their effects on inclusive teaching have rarely been investigated empirically. This is where the present study comes in. This study explores three general research questions, focusing on the importance of (shared) goals between regular teachers and special education teachers when collaborating with regard to inclusive teaching:

1. What profession-specific goals do regular teachers pursue in the context of collaboration?
2. What profession-specific goals do special education teachers pursue in the context of collaboration?
3. What shared goals emerge between regular and special education teachers during collaboration?

Data and Sample To answer the research questions, an online-interview study was conducted with individual members of teacher teams, each consisting of one regular teacher and one special education teacher. The sample was recruited from a total of ten primary and secondary schools in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. At each school, two teacher teams were interviewed, resulting in a total of N = 40 interviews, including 20 regular teachers and 20 special education teachers. Procedure and Instruments The problem-centred interview (PCI) method by Witzel (2000) was used to collect the data needed to answer the research questions. The PCI aims to capture individual actions and subjective perceptions and provides a way to analyse social reality as impartially as possible (Witzel, 2000). This interview method consists of four phases, which are followed in a predefined order. Firstly, before the start of the interview, participants were asked to complete a short questionnaire, which focused, for example, on their professional training and collabo-ration partners, as well as the frequency and specific implementation of collaboration. The interview then began with the request to describe their most recent collaborative lessons, followed by a preformulated introductory question, allowing the interviewees to share their experiences freely. In this case, this question was: “What specific goals did you pursue in these most recent lessons?” Subsequently, questions for general exploration were asked to further investigate thematic aspects of the responses that required deeper insight. In the fourth and final phase, ad-hoc-questions were used to gain information about remaining topics of interest, such as the role of the principal or pupils with special educational needs. The data was then analysed using an inductive, summarizing content analysis. In this process, a category system was developed by following seven clearly defined steps. It is thus a criteria-driven method for reducing large data sets (Schreier, 2012). Once the smallest units of analysis had been defined, the amount of data was reduced in four steps, leading to the sixth step, the development of an inductive category system. At this point, we also deductively formed superordinate categories under which the individual inductive categories were subsumed. Finally, the category system was checked by an independent interrater to ensure that it accurately reflected the content of the data in the first place.

The findings from the summarized content analysis provided valuable insights into the varying priorities and professional perspectives of teachers. With regard to the first research question, we observed that regular teachers primarily focused on the class as a whole, the teaching process, and ensuring progress with the curriculum content. In contrast, special education teachers emphasized goals related to differentiation and support of students with special educational needs. These differences align with the distinct professional backgrounds and training of the two groups: while regular teachers are generally trained to manage heterogeneous classrooms with a subject-specific focus, special education teachers are specifically prepared to address learning barriers, behavioural challenges, and individualized support needs. Reflecting on the third research question, both regular teachers and special education teachers expressed concern about the well-being of the pupils in the classroom and the implementation of efficient classroom management. This indicates shared goals that extend beyond purely instructional objectives and underscore the importance of fostering a supportive and inclusive learning environment for all pupils. Fostering a structured dialogue about goal-setting in co-teaching contexts may help bridge the gap between the distinct professional cultures of regular and special education teachers, ultimately promoting a more effective and sustainable implementation of inclusive education.

Driskell, J.E., Salas, E., Driskell, T. (2018). Foundations of teamwork and collaboration. Am Psychol, 73(4), 334-348. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000241 Fewster-Thuente, L. (2015). Working together toward a common goal: A grounded theory of nurse-physician collaboration. Research for Practice, 24, 356–362. Finkelstein, S., Sharma, U. & Furlonger, B. (2019). The inclusive practices of classroom teachers: a scoping review and thematic analyses. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 25(6), 735-762. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1572232 Grosche, M., Fussangel, K. & Gräsel, C. (2020). Kokonstruktive Kooperation zwischen Lehrkräften. Aktualisierung und Erweiterung der Kokonstruktionstheorie sowie deren Anwendung am Beispiel schulischer Inklusion. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 66(4), 461-479. Grosche, M. & Moser-Opitz, E. (2023). Kooperation von Lehrkräften zur Umsetzung von inklusivem Unterricht – notwendige Bedingung, zu einfach gedacht oder überbewerteter Faktor?. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 51, 245-263. Lütje-Klose, B. & Urban, M. (2014). Professionelle Kooperation als wesentliche Bedingung inklusiver Schul- und Unterrichtsentwicklung. Grundlagen und Modelle inklusiver Kooperation: Teil 1: Grundlagen und Modelle inklusiver Kooperation. Vierteljahresschrift für Heilpädagogik und ihre Nachbargebiete, 83(2), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.2378/vhn2014.art09d Mulvale, G., Embrett, M., & Razavi, S. D. (2016). “Gearing up” to improve interprofession-al collaboration in primary care: A systematic review and conceptual framework. BMC Family Practice, 17(83), 1–13. Moser-Opitz, E., Maag Merki, K., Pfaffhauser, R., Stöckli, M. & Garrote (2021). Die Wirkung von unterschiedlichen Formen von co-teaching auf die von den Schülerinnen und Schülern wahrgenommene Unterrichtsqualität in inklusiven Klassen. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 49, 443–466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42010-021-00103-0 Paulsrud, D. & Nilholm, C. (2023). Teaching for inclusion – a review of research on the co operation between regular teachers and special educators in the work with students in need of special support. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27(4), 541-555. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1846799 Richter, D. & Pant, H.A. (2016). Lehrerkooperation in Deutschland. Eine Studie zu kooperativen Arbeitsbeziehungen bei Lehrkräften der Sekundarstufe I. Bertelsmann Stiftung. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. Los Angeles: Sage. Urton, K., Wilbert, J., Krull, J. & Hennemann, T. (2023). Factors explaining teachers’ intention to implement inclusive practices in the classroom: Indications based on the theory of planned behaviour. Teaching and Teacher Education, 132, 1-11. Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F. & Raes, E. (2016). Team learning in teacher teams: team entitativity as a bridge between teams-in-theory and teams-in-practice. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31, 275-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0279-0. Witzel, A. (2000). The problem-Centered Interview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 1(1), Art. 22.