Since the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, there are numerous questions concerning the implementation of inclusive learning processes in primary school. One important question concerns the enhancement of pre-service and in-service teachers’ competencies for inclusive learning processes in schools. In particular, collaboration such as team-teaching processes of primary school teachers and special needs teachers is regarded as an important prerequisite for children’s successful learning processes in primary schools (European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education, 2012). Following Ferguson and Wilson (2011), team-teaching in inclusive classrooms occurs when two or more teachers equally manage learning processes and assume the responsibility for all children. In this type of teacher collaboration, two or more teachers plan, perform and evaluate the lessons together in teams. 

Teachers’ successful collaboration in inclusive primary education is influenced by various prerequisites (Arndt & Werning, 2013). For instance, successful collaborations are related to the teachers’ individual personality level (e.g., teachers’ self-concepts, teachers’ self-efficacy, e.g., Hamman et al., 2013). Additionally, it could be shown that teachers’ collaboration in class is combined with specific difficulties, such as different ideas about the effective composition of students’ individual learning processes, concrete working agreements, competencies, responsibilities in the classrooms and role-clarities (e.g., Arndt, 2014; Nel et al., 2014; Shaffer & Thomas-Braun, 2015; Stefanidis & Strogilos, 2015). Teachers consider cooperative working as little avail, if essential structures are missing and if personal relationships in teams are perceived as difficult (Gurgur & Uzuner, 2011; Kritikos & Birnbaum, 2003).  

Although these findings are currently available, it is still largely unclear how pre-service and in-service teachers develop their skills and performance-related personality when they teach in a team. For example, it is currently still unclear how the professional self-concepts of pre-service and in-service teachers develop in relation to teaching and collaboration. It can be assumed that when teaching in a team, one’s own strengths and weaknesses become visible, as well as those of the other person. According to Festinger’s ‘Theory of Social Comparison Processes’ (1954), people compare themselves with each other in social situations in order to learn more about themselves and develop their self-concepts. Teacher self-concept is thereby defined as knowledge of (pre-service) teachers about their own strengths and weaknesses (Marsh et al., 2012; Yeung et al., 2014). Positive self-concepts of teachers with regard to inclusive teaching are considered important conditions for their personal job satisfaction, their psychological well-being and the successful skill acquisition by their students (Friedmann & Farber, 1992; Yeung et al., 2014). 

Following Festinger’s ‘Theory of Social Comparison Processes’ (1954), we assume that pre-service teachers are better able to compare themselves with each other, if they already know each other and have information about the other person (e.g. about their own strengths and weaknesses, interests, talents) during team teaching. If, on the other hand, pre-service teachers teach in a team that does not yet know each other, they will have difficulties comparing themselves because they lack relevant information. They will have to painstakingly gather this information about their counterparts while working together. Particularly, pre-service teachers are still forming their professional identities. Thus, how they engage with different types of partners in collaborative settings may influence their self-perceptions of competence, confidence in inclusive teaching, and overall professional growth (Yeung et al., 2014). Against this background, we assume that pre-service teachers who are allowed to choose a partner for team teaching benefit significantly more in their professional self-concept development (with regard to teaching in inclusive lessons and collaboration) than pre-service teachers who are assigned randomly to each other.

In our study, N = 155 represented the pre-service primary school teachers and pre-service special needs teachers in the Master of Education-program from a university in Germany (North Rhine-Westphalia) who participated in our study. The students’ average age was approximately 23 years (M = 23.15, SD = 4.47). Our study was embedded in university courses on the didactics of science. The pre-service teachers participated in a training to acquire competencies concerning their cooperation in inclusive education. In this training, the students became familiar with different forms of team-teaching strategies (and their advantages and disadvantages) for the organization of inclusive education. Afterwards, the pre-service teachers were assigned to one of our study groups. Approximately half of the pre-service teachers (n = 81) could choose their tandem partner, and the other half of the pre-service teachers (n = 74) was randomly assigned in pairs. The pre-service teachers who were randomly assigned in pairs were asked to state all the fellow students that they already have known from their university courses or their leisure time. This was done in order to ensure that the pre-service teachers who were in not freely selected teams really collaborated with a partner that they have not known before. The pre-service teachers planned in tandems science lessons on the subject of renewable energies and taught groups of children in inclusive or non-inclusive primary schools over a period of three lessons. On the basis of a pre- and post-questionnaire, we investigated pre-service teachers’ professional self-concept development on the basis of two questionnaire scales. The pre-service teachers were asked to provide information on their professional self-concept concerning the planning and implementing of inclusive teaching (e.g., “I am confident that the tasks involved in planning and implementing inclusive instruction will be easy for me.”; 10 items; α = .77/.83) and on their professional self-concept concerning their collaboration with others (e.g., “I am confident that I will work well with other teachers.”; 10 items; α = .85/.85). At the end, the pre-service teachers were questioned about personal satisfaction with their partner collaboration (e.g., “The collaborative work with my team partner satisfies me.”; 8 items, α = .96). The pre-service teachers made their assessments on 5-point Likert scales (1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”).

For the verification of our hypothesis, analyses of variance (ANOVAs) for repeated measures were calculated. Not supporting our hypothesis, the pre-service teachers who chose their tandem partner and the ones who were randomly assigned in pairs do not differ significantly in their professional self-concept development concerning the planning and implementing of inclusive teaching and concerning their collaboration with others. However, if we look at the group of pre-service teachers who have been assigned to each other in relation to their satisfaction, it becomes clear that tandems with low and high satisfaction with partner collaboration differ significantly concerning their professional self-concept development. Here, the professional self-concept development of pre-service teachers with low satisfaction decreased significantly from measurement point one to measurement point two, while the self-concept development of pre-service teachers with high satisfaction increased significantly. In summary, our findings indicate that promoting pre-service teachers’ professional self-concepts through practical experiences is not an easy endeavor. In summary, our findings indicate that students do not differ from each other in terms of their professional self-concepts regarding lesson planning or collaboration, regardless of whether or not they can choose each other when teaching. However, when students are assigned to each other, satisfaction is an influencing factor in terms of their personal development. This should also be taken into account when putting together teams of teachers in schools.

Arndt, A.-K. (2014). Multiprofessionelle Teams bei der Umsetzung inklusiver Bildung [Multiprofessional teams in the implementation of inclusion]. Archiv für Wissenschaft und Praxis der sozialen Arbeit, 45(1), 72–79. Arndt, A.-K., & Werning, R. (2013). Unterrichtsbezogene Kooperation von Regelschullehrkräften und Lehrkräften für Sonderpädagogik: Ergebnisse eines qualitativen Forschungsprojektes [Regular teachers’ and special needs teachers’ cooperation in class: Results from a qualitative study]. In R. Werning, & A.-K. Arndt (Eds.), Inklusion: Kooperation und Unterricht entwickeln (pp. 12–40). Klinkhardt. European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education (2012). Profile of inclusive teachers. European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education. Ferguson, J., & Wilson, J. C. (2011). The co-teaching professorship: Power and expertise in the co-taught higher education classroom. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly, 5(1), 52–68. Gurgur, H., & Uzuner, Y. (2011). Examining the implementation of two co-teaching models: Team teaching and station teaching. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(6), 589–610. Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. Friedman, I. A., & Farber, B. A. (1992). Professional self-concept as a predictor of teacher burnout. The Journal of Educational Research, 86(1), 28–35. Hamman, D., Lechtenberger, D., Griffin-Shirley, N., & Zhou, L. (2013). Beyond exposure to collaboration: Preparing general-education teacher candidates for inclusive practice. The Teacher Educator, 48(4), 244–256. Kritikos, E. P., & Birnbaum, B. (2003). General education and special education teachers’ beliefs regarding collaboration. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 12(3), 93–100. Marsh, H. W., Xu, M., & Martin, A. J. (2012). Self-concept: A synergy of theory, method, and application. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Educational Psychology Handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 427–458). American Psychological Association. Nel, M., Engelbrecht, P., Nel, N., & Tlale, D. (2014). South African teachers’ views of collaboration within an inclusive education system. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(9), 903–917. Shaffer, L., & Thomas-Brown, K. (2015). Enhancing teacher competency through co-teaching and embedded professional development. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(3), 117–125. Stefanidis, A., & Strogilos, V. (2015). Union gives strength: Mainstream and special education teachers’ responsibilities in inclusive co-taught classrooms. Educational Studies, 41(4), 393–413. Yeung, A. S., Craven, R. G., & Kaur, G. (2014). Influences of mastery goal and perceived competence on educational outcomes. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 14, 117–130.