This paper presentation addresses the question of which professional competences are currently considered essential for inclusive education professionals across Europe, based on the results of an international e-Delphi study undertaken to update the European Profile for Inclusive Education Professionals. The presentation focuses on the outcomes of the consensus process and their implications for research, policy, and professional education, rather than on the study protocol itself.

The central research question guiding the study is: What core and emerging competences should define the professional profile of inclusive education professionals in contemporary European education systems? This question reflects the need to revisit existing competence frameworks in light of significant changes in European and international educational contexts, including increasing learner diversity, expanded inclusion agendas across educational sectors, digitalisation of teaching and learning, and growing attention to wellbeing and mental health.

The paper is situated within a theoretical framework of inclusive education as a rights-based, systemic, and dynamic process. Inclusion is conceptualised as extending beyond individual learner support to encompass institutional cultures, inter-professional collaboration, and policy-level action. The competence concept is understood as an integrated combination of knowledge, skills, attitudes, and professional values, aligned with competence-based approaches to professional learning and teacher education widely adopted across Europe. This framework draws on international human rights instruments, particularly the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as well as European policy commitments to equity, participation, and lifelong learning.

From a methodological perspective, the study employed an international e-Delphi design involving experts from multiple European countries and diverse professional roles, including researchers, teacher educators, policy representatives, and practitioners from different educational sectors. The Delphi process consisted of multiple iterative rounds combining quantitative rating of competence statements with qualitative feedback. Participants evaluated the relevance of proposed competences using a nine-point scale, with consensus determined through predefined statistical criteria based on median scores and interquartile ranges. Levels of agreement across rounds were examined using Kendall’s coefficient of concordance, while qualitative comments were analysed thematically to identify emerging themes and areas of conceptual refinement.

The paper presentation foregrounds the results of the Delphi process, presenting the final set of agreed competence domains and highlighting key areas of continuity and change compared to the original European Profile. Particular emphasis is placed on competence areas that gained strong consensus across countries, as well as on newly articulated or substantially strengthened domains. These include working systemically for inclusion, addressing learner and professional wellbeing, responding to digital transformation including the use of AI, and extending the competence profile to contexts such as higher education and lifelong learning.

The intended purpose of the presentation is to contribute to international scholarly and professional debates on inclusive education by offering an empirically grounded, consensus-based competence framework with clear European relevance. The paper aims to demonstrate how international expert agreement can support shared reference points for professional development while remaining sensitive to national and local contexts. By presenting results derived from cross-national collaboration, the paper highlights both common priorities and contextual diversity in understandings of inclusive professionalism, thereby supporting future research, policy development, and professional learning initiatives at European and international levels.

The study employed an international e-Delphi methodology to establish expert consensus on the professional competences required for inclusive education professionals in contemporary European contexts. The Delphi method was selected due to its suitability for systematically synthesising expert judgement across countries and professional systems, while allowing iterative refinement of complex constructs such as professional competences. An international expert panel was recruited using purposive sampling to ensure broad representation across European regions, professional roles, and educational sectors. Participants included researchers in inclusive education, teacher educators, policy actors, and experienced practitioners working in primary, secondary, higher, and lifelong learning contexts. Experts were invited based on their demonstrated expertise through professional roles, research, or policy involvement in inclusive education. All rounds were conducted online to facilitate international participation. The e-Delphi process consisted of three iterative rounds. In Round 1, participants reviewed and commented on an initial set of competence domains and statements derived from the original European Profile for Inclusive Education Professionals and a targeted review of recent European and international policy and research literature. Participants provided qualitative feedback and suggestions for additions, modifications, and emerging competence areas. These data were analysed thematically and used to refine and expand the competence framework. In Rounds 2 and 3, participants rated the relevance of the revised competence statements using a nine-point Likert-type scale, where higher scores indicated greater perceived importance for inclusive education professionals. Quantitative consensus was assessed using predefined statistical criteria, with inclusion consensus defined by a median score of seven or higher and an interquartile range of two or less. Items with low median scores were considered for exclusion, while items not meeting consensus criteria were revised and re-rated in subsequent rounds. To examine the degree of agreement among experts, Kendall’s coefficient of concordance was calculated across rating rounds. Qualitative comments from Rounds 2 and 3 were again analysed thematically to support interpretation of quantitative findings and to clarify areas of disagreement or conceptual ambiguity. The primary data sources for the study consisted of expert ratings and open-ended textual responses collected through secure online survey instruments. Together, these quantitative and qualitative data provided a robust basis for identifying consensus-based competence domains and for capturing emerging priorities across European inclusive education contexts.

The findings of this study demonstrate a high level of international consensus on the core professional competences required for inclusive education professionals across diverse European contexts. The e-Delphi process resulted in a refined and updated competence profile that both confirms the continued relevance of the original European Profile for Inclusive Education Professionals and extends it in response to contemporary educational challenges. Across countries and professional roles, experts showed strong agreement on the importance of competences related to valuing learner diversity, collaborative practice, and professional responsibility for inclusive learning environments. At the same time, the study identified significant shifts in emphasis that reflect current European and international developments in inclusive education. Notably, competences related to working systemically for inclusion, engaging with policy and institutional structures, and contributing to whole-system change achieved strong consensus. This indicates a shared understanding that inclusive education professionals require capabilities that extend beyond classroom-level practice. The updated profile also highlights emerging competence areas that were either absent or less explicit in the original framework. These include addressing learner and professional wellbeing, responding critically and ethically to digitalisation and the use of AI in education, and applying inclusive principles across a wider range of educational contexts, including higher education and lifelong learning. The consensus achieved across multiple European regions suggests that these areas represent common priorities rather than context-specific concerns. Overall, the study provides a robust, empirically grounded competence framework that can serve as a shared European reference point for research, professional education, and policy development. The findings underline the value of international consensus-building approaches for supporting coherence in inclusive education while respecting contextual diversity. The updated competence profile is expected to inform future curriculum design, professional development initiatives, and comparative research, thereby contributing to the sustainable advancement of inclusive education across Europe and beyond.

Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: Lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 7-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587 Ainscow, M., Slee, R., & Best, M. (2019). the Salamanca Statement: 25 years on. Taylor & Francis. Brussino, O. (2021). Building capacity for inclusive teaching: Policies and practices to prepare all teachers for diversity and inclusion. OECD Education Working Papers, 256, 0_1-125. De Vroey, A., Lecheval, A., & Symeonidou, S. (2023). Supporting all educators to take part in teacher professional learning for inclusion. Trends in Higher Education, 2(2), 320-331. Engelbrecht, P. (2013). Teacher education for inclusion, international perspectives. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 115-118. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778110 European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education. (2012). Profile of Inclusive Teachers. European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education. European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. (2022). Profile for Inclusive Teacher Professional Learning: Including All Education Professionals in Teacher Professional Learning for Inclusion. EASNIE. UNESCO. (2015). SDG4-Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action. For the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4, Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all (ED-2016/WS/28). United Nations Educational, S., & Organization (UNESCO), C. (2020). Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and education: All means all. 92310038. Watkins, A., & Donnelly, V. (2014). Core values as the basis for teacher education for inclusion. Global Education Review, 1(1). https://ger.mercy.edu/index.php/ger/article/view/9