Inclusive school leadership has been recognized as a critical factor in promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in a diverse student population (Bhowmik et al., 2023; White et al., 2025). Although inclusive leadership has been strongly promoted in policy agendas, its implementation in practice has been found to vary and depend on contextual factors (Bellibaş et al., 2025). The present study aims to explore, through a qualitative comparative study, how inclusive school leadership is understood, implemented, and experienced in mainstream schools in three unique education systems, namely China, Switzerland, and the USA. The research aims to address the following research queries: What are the perceptions and understandings of inclusive leadership from the perspectives of school leaders and teachers? What core themes of inclusive school leadership emerge from the perspectives of school leaders and teachers?

The study employed an inclusive school leadership framework, proposed by the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2018), that recognizes three core functions of school leadership, namely, setting direction, organizational development, and human development (Óskarsdóttir et al., 2020). Data collection was conducted through semi-structured interviews with school principals and teachers from a sample of mainstream schools in China, Switzerland, and the USA. Instead of preparing case descriptions of each country, thematic comparison was employed, highlighting universal leadership principles while acknowledging contextual variations. Data analysis was conducted through reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2021).

The results showed similarities and differences in the implementation of inclusive school leadership within the three contexts. In all contexts, the leaders emphasized a student-centered approach, balancing high expectations and holistic approaches to student well-being, including the social, emotional, and psychological aspects (Jarvis, 2011). This was realized through differentiated learning expectations, a strength-based approach, and leadership styles emphasizing the significance of student well-being to learning, rather than as an "add-on" to learning. Inclusive pedagogy was also a focus, including a range of approaches such as flexible curricula, growth-oriented assessment, data-informed individualized approaches, and collaborative teaching approaches, which resonates with current research on coordinated student support (Paccaud et al., 2021; Testa, 2023). Teacher growth and development was also a focus within the contexts, including mentoring, teacher observation, and using data and feedback in a developmental manner, which resonates with past research on teacher growth within inclusive contexts (DeMatthews, 2015). In addition, leaders developed a culture of collaboration and shared responsibility among teachers, families, and community members, emphasizing the significance of collective responsibility within inclusive school cultures (Coburn, 2003; Dorczak, 2013).

Notable differences were also identified in the context of enactment. For example, leadership practices in China were marked by structural differentiation, clear role differentiation, and support structuring (e.g., shadow teachers, resource classrooms) and monitoring. Leaders in Switzerland focused on developmentally responsive and relational leadership practices for diverse classrooms, with a strong emphasis on dialogic communication, flexibility, and community integration. Leaders in the United States emphasized inclusive leadership practices within standards-based accountability systems, which included multi-tiered systems of support, and cultural responsiveness, identity affirmation, and student voice.

The study underscores that inclusive school leadership is a complex and dynamic process that is maintained through the integration of student values, organizational alignment, continuous capacity building, and collaborative ecosystems. Although the processes of direction setting, organizational development, and human development are apparent across the different contexts, their implementation is highly influenced by national policies, cultural beliefs, and organizational structures. This study has made significant contributions to the body of knowledge on the processes involved in inclusive leadership implementation across different systems, providing a more nuanced perspective on its role as a critical driver of inclusive outcomes.

This study employed a qualitative approach to examine the phenomenon of inclusive school leadership in China, Switzerland, and the United States. The analytic approach was comparative, focusing on the similarities and differences in the experiences in the three countries, rather than providing a distinct narrative for each country. Participants consisted of 15 principals and 28 teachers drawn from mainstream schools with established inclusive education practices across the three national contexts. In China, participants included seven principals and nine teachers from primary and secondary schools in six cities. In Switzerland, four principals and twelve teachers were recruited from four schools spanning urban, suburban, and rural settings, covering grades Kindergarten through nine. In the United States, four principals and seven teachers participated from four public schools in New Jersey, which served elementary, middle, and high school levels. The sampling was done using a purposive sampling method to ensure that the schools had inclusive practices, and the sample size was based on data saturation (Carter et al., 2014). Data collection was carried out using a method of semi-structured interviews via video-conferencing tools such as Tencent Meeting and Zoom. An interview protocol was created following the three key functions of the conceptual framework: setting direction, organizational development, and human development (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2018). The interview protocol was refined. The interviews lasted approximately one hour. The interviews were carried out using either Chinese or English, according to the interviewees’ preferences. The interviews were recorded using audio recordings. The researcher also took field notes. The interview questions focused on interviewees’ experiences, perceptions, and leadership decision-making processes concerning inclusive education. The questions allowed for flexibility to explore interviewees’ experiences. The interview questions allowed for flexibility to explore interviewees’ experiences, perceptions, and leadership decision-making processes concerning inclusive education (Mertler, 2018). The process of data analysis included the six-step procedure of reflexive thematic analysis as described by Braun and Clarke (2021). This included familiarization with the data, coding of the data, and development of themes. The process of reflexive thematic analysis included the use of analytic memos to record the reflexive process. Themes were developed through constant comparison and then placed into the three broad domains of the inclusive leadership framework as described by Braun and Clarke (2021). This helped to ensure that the data analysis was grounded in the data while also allowing for theoretically informed interpretation of the data.

This comparative analysis sheds light on the intricacy involved in inclusive school leadership practices in China, Switzerland, and the USA. The findings suggest that, although the basic functions of inclusive leadership, such as setting direction, developing the organization, and developing people, are relevant across diverse contexts, their practice is heavily influenced by national policies, cultural factors, and school structures. The major findings suggest that inclusive leadership in schools can be an effective practice that balances high academic expectations with an unrelenting commitment to holistic student well-being and equity (Jarvis, 2011; Leithwood, 2021). Moreover, the findings suggest that inclusive education can be achieved through a collective approach that emphasizes responsibility through collaboration, communication, and decision-making among teachers, families, and community stakeholders (Coburn, 2003). Teacher development and data use are found to be an integral part of inclusive leadership practice, as professional development becomes a relational and data-informed practice for teachers (DeMatthews, 2015). For European countries, this study has specific implications. The study found that European countries could improve inclusion through: (1) formalizing distributed leadership and teacher-led professional learning communities to further develop shared responsibility; (2) investing in continuous professional development that links pedagogic differentiation with holistic student well-being; and (3) improving data systems that go beyond accountability measures to support diverse learners through relational and instructional support. The comparison, especially in terms of support structures and relational support, encourages European countries to consider how to strike a balance in terms of policy coherence and adaptability.

Bellibaş, M. Ş., Karaferye, F., & Walker, A. (2025). How cultural context shapes school leadership and its effectiveness: A systematic review. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 57(3), 437–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432251396683 Bhowmik, M. K., Walker, A., & Bryant, D. (2023). Reconceptualizing inclusive leadership to address diversity in schools. Multicultural Education Review, 15(2), 139–156. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18 (3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547 Coburn, C. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x032006003 DeMatthews, D. (2015). Making sense of social justice leadership: A case study of a principal’s experiences to create a more inclusive school. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 14(2), 139–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2014.997939 Dorczak, R. (2013). Inclusion through the lens of school culture. In G. Mac Ruairc, E. Ottesen, & R. Precey (Eds.), Leadership for Inclusive Education (pp. 47–57). Springer. European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. (2018). Supporting inclusive school leadership: Literature review. https://www.european-agency.org/sites/default/files/SISL_Literature_Review.pdf Jarvis, J. M. (2011). Promoting mental health through inclusive pedagogy. In R. H. Shute, P. T. Slee, R. Murray-Harvey, & K. L. Dix (Eds.), Mental health and wellbeing: Educational perspectives (pp. 237–248). Shannon Research Press. Leithwood, K. (2021). A review of evidence about equitable school leadership. Education Sciences, 11(8), 377. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080377 Mertler, C. A. (2018). Introduction to educational research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications. Óskarsdóttir, E., Donnelly, V., Turner-Cmuchal, M., & Florian, L. (2020). Inclusive school leaders – their role in raising the achievement of all learners. Journal of Educational Administration, 58(5), 521–537. https://doi.org/10.1108/jea-10-2019-0190 Paccaud, A., Keller, R., Luder, R., Pastore, G., & Kunz, A. (2021). Satisfaction with the collaboration between families and schools – the parent's view. Frontiers in Education, 6, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.646878 Testa, D. (2023). Interprofessional collaboration: How social workers, psychologists, and teachers collaborate to address student wellbeing. Australian Social Work, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407x.2023.2256703 White, R., Lowery, C., & Johnson, J. (2025). Enhancing high-quality education through systemic school leadership: a systematic review. Quality Education for All, 2(1), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1108/qea-09-2024-0096