Objectives and Purposes

This study investigates parents’ perspectives on the implementation of inclusive education in All-Day Schools (ADS) in Lithuania (Dudaitė et al., 2019), aiming to develop an empirically grounded model of inclusive ADS. While inclusive education is widely studied in Lithuania, most studies focus on teachers’ or professionals’ viewpoints (Boyle et al., 2023), often overlooking the voice of parents. This research addresses that gap, highlighting parental perceptions as essential for understanding how inclusion is realized in practice.

Theoretical Framework and Background

The implementation of inclusive education requires not only systemic support, but also a coherent conceptual framework that addresses the diversity of learners and the complexity of educational contexts. This study is grounded in a holistic model of inclusive education (Teschers, 2020), which comprises five interrelated dimensions: a holistic approach to teaching, a whole-child perspective, a whole-school approach (Ainscow, 2020; Guðjónsdóttir & Óskarsdóttir, 2016), a community perspective, and a systemic view. These dimensions are not isolated but mutually reinforcing, providing a theoretical foundation for understanding inclusion as a multi-layered phenomenon. In the context of All-Day Schools (ADS), this implies a necessary shift from fragmented practices toward a coherent model that addresses individual needs, ensures equal opportunities, and fosters collaboration. It is particularly important that the model being developed ensures opportunities for the inclusion of all groups of students, including those with special educational needs, whose participation is currently limited due to the non-compulsory nature of ADS and schools’ lack of readiness to accommodate them (Dudaitė et al., 2019).

Research Questions and/or Hypotheses

This study aims to analyse parents’ perspectives on the implementation of inclusive education in All-Day Schools (ADS) and to assess how current ADS models reflect the principles of inclusion in practice. Accordingly, the following research questions are posed:

(RQ1) How do parents view the implementation of inclusion principles in the ADS their children attend?

(RQ2) How parents evaluate child’s well-being at school (emotional well-being, social inclusion, and academic self-concept)?

(RQ3) What conditions, according to parents, are necessary for the meaningful and comprehensive implementation of inclusive education in ADS?

Data, Methods, and Modelling Approaches This presentation introduces the quantitative analysis of parent survey data, conducted as part of a broader mixed-methods study within the Project (Number) and addressing a representative sample of parents in Lithuania. The study involved 2,936 parents from various Lithuanian regions whose children attended ADS groups. The sample represents diverse social, economic, and geographic contexts, ensuring the inclusivity and variability of data. A standardized questionnaire was used, covering demographic variables, characteristics of ADS implementation, parents’ evaluations of their children’s well-being (emotional well-being, social inclusion, and academic self-concept), implementation of inclusion principles, and suggestions for future development (Boyle et al., 2013; Venetz et al., 2015). The data were analysed using descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations), with further regression analysis planned to identify associations between key variables.

Results and Discussion The study results reveal that most children attend public schools (98.3%), with the predominant model being extended-day programs offered on a non-mandatory basis (73%). First (RQ1), parents generally evaluated inclusion-related aspects positively, especially emphasizing equal treatment of children regardless of their family’s social status, meaningful after-school activities, and school–parent cooperation, reflecting findings from broader European studies on effective ADS practices (Pfeifer & Holtappels, 2008). Relatedly, we found that support services are most provided by speech therapists, teaching assistants, and special education teachers. However, 2.8% of parents noted that support was needed but not provided, revealing an existing gap in service accessibility. Second (RQ2). high average scores (ranging from 3.87 to 4.10 on a 5-point scale) indicated a broadly positive perception of inclusiveness in the ADS context. Children’s emotional well-being (M = 3.48), social inclusion (M = 3.55), and academic self-perception (M = 3.29) showed encouraging trends, suggesting that ADS can be a supportive environment for children’s holistic development. Third (RQ3), concerning conditions for meaningful implementation of inclusive education in ADS, overall mean scores ranged from 3.98 to 4.27 on a 5-point scale. The points rated as still requiring more attention were provision of support to meet individual learning needs, ensuring each student’s progress and achievement, and developing effective ways to organize education. Despite these preliminary findings, further analyses are planned to investigate how parents’ evaluations of the implementation of inclusion in ADS vary depending on the type of school, the child’s individual needs, the availability of support services, and the organisational model of the ADS. Also, how these aspects are interrelated in correlational and regression analyses.

References 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 Boyle, C., Barrell, C., Allen, K.-A., & She, L. (2023). Primary and secondary pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education. Heliyon, 9(11), Article e22328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22328 Boyle, C., Topping, K., & Jindal-Snape, D. (2013). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion in high schools. Teachers and Teaching, 19(5), 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.827361 Dudaitė, J., et al., (2019). Visos dienos mokykla: modeliai ir įgyvendinimo prielaidos: Mokslo studija [All-day school: Models and implementation]. Vilnius: Mykolo Romerio universitetas. Guðjónsdóttir, H., & Óskarsdóttir, E. (2016). Inclusive education, pedagogy and practice. Science Education Towards Inclusion, 7–22. Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Pfeifer, M., & Holtappels, H. G. (2008). Improving learning in all-day schools: Results of a new teaching time model. European Educational Research Journal EERJ, 7(2), 232–242. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2008.7.2.232 Teschers, C. (2020). Proposing a holistic inclusive education model for policy, curriculum and classroom development. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 17(1and2), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.24135/teacherswork.v17i1and2.299 Venetz, M., Zurbriggen, C. L. A., Eckhart, M., Schwab, S., & Hessels, M. G. P. (2015). The Perceptions of Inclusion Questionnaire (PIQ). English Version. www.piqinfo.ch