METHODOLOGICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

“Raising the level of pedagogical skills of primary school teachers in the framework of inclusive education”

Astana

2025

Disclaimer

This work is an object of copyright and is protected in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan, in particular, the Law “On Copyright and Related Rights”. Any use, reproduction, distribution, public performance or other application of this work must be strictly authorized by the authors. Unauthorized use of this work may entail liability in accordance with the current legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

©️ All rights reserved

Authors: Assem Tazhiyeva, Aliya Khamza, Aliya Sabitova

within the framework of the activities of the “Association for the Development of Inclusive Society” ALE and IE

We express our sincere gratitude to sponsors and partners for their support in the development of these guidelines and implementation of the pilot project.

Special thanks to:

Nazarbayev University Social Development Fund - for financial support and contribution to the successful implementation of the project.

“Methodological Center” of Astana city akimat and SOE on the REM “School-Gymnasium № 96” of Astana city akimat - for cooperation, exchange of experience and assistance in the development of inclusive education.

Thank you for your support and contribution to the development of inclusive education! Thanks to you, more children have access to quality education.

Together we create a world without barriers!

Table of Contents

Glossary

IEP - Individual Educational Plan is a personalized educational program, developed taking into account the peculiarities, needs and opportunities of the student. IEP may include adaptation of the content of academic subjects, change of the pace of mastering the material, use of special teaching methods and technologies. In educational institutions, IEP is often used for children with special educational needs and talented students, as well as in the framework of inclusive education.

AR - Action research is a method of scientific research in which practitioners analyze their own activities, identify problems, develop and implement changes, and then evaluate their effectiveness.

SEN - Special educational needs are the needs of students arising from their individual characteristics that require adaptation of the educational process. SENs may be related to disabilities, intellectual, sensory or physical impairments, emotional and behavioral difficulties, and giftedness.

FGD - Focus Group Discussion is a qualitative research method in which a small group of participants (usually 6-12 people) discuss a given topic under the guidance of a moderator. This method allows for a deeper understanding of participants' opinions, motivations and experiences, identifying hidden problems and testing new ideas.

Introduction

Inclusive education plays a key role in the development of the modern educational system, as it provides equal opportunities for all learners, regardless of their individual characteristics. The importance of inclusion and inclusive education lies not only in the creation of accessible infrastructure, but, above all, in the organization of learning in classrooms where each child can feel a full participant in the learning process (Makoelle et al., 2023). SOE on the REM “School-Gymnasium №96” of the Astana City Akimat, functioning for only one year, was chosen by the research team as the object of study due to its commitment to the holistic implementation of the whole school approach and readiness to analyze and improve educational processes. Coordination of efforts of administration, teachers, parents and students, as well as the availability of adapted infrastructure (elevators, ramps, tactile paths, elevators, specialized rooms) create conditions for the formation of an inclusive educational environment and stimulate the professional development of teachers.

The success of inclusive education depends on many factors, but teachers have a key role to play in its implementation. Their professional skills, training and ability to adapt approaches to each student determine how successfully inclusion will be realized in the school environment (Makoelle & Burmistrova, 2021). It is important to note that in order to achieve this, educators need systematic professional development and mastery of new competencies (UNICEF, 2022). Therefore, investing in teacher professional development is key to successfully implementing inclusive education and creating equal opportunities for all learners.

In this regard, the team of the pilot project on “Improving the pedagogical skills of primary school teachers in the framework of inclusive education”, taking into account the need for a more in-depth study of the difficulties faced by teachers, began research work using the method of focus group interviews. This allowed us to identify the main difficulties and problem areas in pedagogical practice, which became the basis for the development of a training program. Our goal is to create a program that will take into account all the needs of teachers and promote systemic change in the field of inclusive education.

A special feature of our approach is the focus on the actual needs of teachers, which allows us to create training programs that meet their demands to the maximum extent possible. In the process of developing the program, we carefully analyzed the teachers' requirements and built the program design based on their feedback. Each stage of the project included validation of our findings, which ensured flexibility and adaptability of the program.

During the training, we actively interacted with the teachers: we held talks and discussions, recorded their questions and difficult moments, observed their work in the process of training in order to take into account their opinions and suggestions on the content of the program. After going through the program, teachers shared their feedback, which allowed us to make necessary adjustments and improve the program. An important part of our approach was post-training support, which included the possibility of consulting with the project team experts already in the process of implementing new knowledge in educational practice. This helped teachers to apply the new skills effectively and provided support at every stage of their professional development in the context of inclusive education. We especially want to note that in this project teachers were not just participants, but took an active role as designers of the program, which allowed us to take into account their practical needs and make the learning process as effective as possible. We express our gratitude to the administration and teachers of SOE on the REM “School-Gymnasium №96” of the akimat of Astana city for close cooperation and successful joint implementation of the project, which allowed us to achieve significant results in the implementation of the pilot project.

The purpose of this document is to summarize the results and experience gained during the conducted training program on inclusive education and to provide the developed methodological recommendations to methodologists, trainers and specialists involved in the training and professional development of teachers in the field of inclusive education. This development will be useful for school principals, administrators of educational institutions, as well as managers of correctional and inclusive centers who seek to implement and support effective inclusive practices in their organizations. The document includes brief conclusions about the content of the training, analysis of the results achieved and difficulties encountered, as well as recommendations based on the analysis, which are aimed at further developing teachers' skills and maintaining an inclusive environment in educational institutions.

Action research

Action research methodology is widely used in the creation of new programs because it allows for real-time adaptation of approaches and the ability to address the unique needs of participants (Brydon-Miller & Maguire, 2009). We chose this methodology to engage educators in collaborative program development given the experiences and challenges of educators. In our search for methods that could improve the inclusive educational process, we turned to a research-in-action approach. In discussing the most effective ways to improve the quality of inclusive education practice, we defined action research (AR) as “a systematic approach to personal, organizational, and structural transformation” (Brydon-Miller & Maguire, 2009, p. 80). Action research included five components aligned with Dewey's model of reflective thinking and action: identifying difficulties, proposing and discussing solutions, developing people's capacities, implementing practice change, and systematic monitoring (Miettinen, 2000). Each of the five components of the cycle has a specific purpose (Miettinen, 2000) (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Purpose of each component in the school practice development cycle

First, we sought to identify the professional development needs of elementary school teachers regarding the development and implementation of IEP. We conducted a focus group discussion (FGD) with teachers about their experiences of using IEP in teaching children with SEN in order to identify the difficulties teachers face and what they would like to overcome.

Second, we analyzed the information obtained in the first FGD and presented these results to the participating teachers. We then invited the teachers to discuss these findings and brainstorm on how the challenges they faced in developing and implementing IEP could be addressed using available resources. The purpose of these two FGDs was to engage teachers in active reflective thinking about their confidence in IEP and to identify issues requiring professional development. Our research team also conducted reflective thinking on the data from the two FGDs to develop a proposal for a professional development training program that would meet the professional development needs of elementary teachers in the school.

The third component of our AR was training. We gave final approval to the proposed plan for the training program, taking into account feedback from teachers and school administration. We presented it again to our cooperating teachers and school administration, and with the approval of all, the program was launched in June 2024.

The fourth component was the teachers' project work, which they defended as the final work of the training. Throughout the program, teachers worked in groups and were invited to develop a plan for a collaborative practice-oriented study to improve the use of IEP. This plan was presented to all AR participants for feedback in June. Teachers expressed their intention to use the tool in practice from the beginning of the new school year in September 2024.

The fifth component of the AR was an evaluation of the changes implemented. In October, we met with the participating teachers to discuss their experiences with the changes they were able to implement based on the training in the professional development program. Once the fifth component is completed, the cycle of identifying problems in existing practices in the school begins again. This is an ongoing cyclical process that allows us to address problems in the school as they arise in a collaborative and systematic way.

After conducting two rounds of interviews, three key issues were identified for attention: ‘knowledge and experience of inclusive education and the development of IEP in the school’, ‘a school timetable that does not take into account the needs of pupils with SEN’, and ‘coordination and collaboration between teachers, support staff and parents’. Based on the identified difficulties, the research team developed a training program, dividing it into three main blocks: “knowledge and experience in the field of inclusive education”, “teachers' leadership skills” and “IEP development” (Appendix 1).

Training program

The training is based on a preliminary analysis of the current development of the school in the framework of inclusive education. We conducted a study visit, where we studied the specifics of the organization of the educational process and discussed with the administration the current issues of inclusion and approaches to teaching children with SEN. The administration expressed readiness to support training aimed at developing teachers' competencies in working with IEP, and agreed on the goals, structure and forms of participation in the program. These conversations helped to establish partnerships, define roles and expectations, and address the needs of the school for successful implementation of the program.

In shaping the program, topics that were challenging for educators to create an inclusive educational system were taken into account. The training program is presented in Appendix 2. For each block, experts with significant professional experience and able to work effectively with the audience were invited. The project team selected speakers according to their experience and professionalism, and 11 speakers participated in the training.

The training on inclusive education for teachers included several key topics, each aimed at developing knowledge and skills for working with children with special educational needs (SEN). The first module, ‘Knowledge and experience in inclusive education and developing IEP’, focused on understanding the characteristics of working with children with SEN and planning for diversity. Strategies for adapting the learning process and resourcing were discussed, including the use of digital tools and artificial intelligence technologies. Participants explored international standards and the rights of children with SEN, in particular the basics of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. An important aspect was a session on the culture, policy and practice of inclusive education, where educators analyzed the principles of inclusion and formulated a mission for their schools. The block concluded with work on educational policies aimed at ensuring equal opportunities for all students (Appendix 2).

The second module focused on leadership and interpersonal skills. The first session touched on coordination and cooperation between educators, support staff and parents to create a cohesive inclusive environment. An important topic was emotional intelligence to help prevent professional burnout and increase effectiveness in challenging situations. Soft skills development included creativity, communication, time management and critical thinking, all of which help teachers to deal effectively with a variety of tasks. A session on digital solutions for inclusion introduced platforms and applications to support children with SEN, allowing participants to learn about technology resources for the educational process. The final theme of the module, Action Research, provided methodological tools for conducting research in educational practice, with a focus on improving the quality of learning and inclusion (Appendix 2).

The third module focused on practical skills and the development of Individualized Education Plans (IEPs). Sessions included practical guidance on working with children with mobility impairments and neuropsychiatric disabilities, as well as adapted and alternative assessment methods to fairly and accurately evaluate the progress of students with SEN. An important session, “Understanding SEN  in children: techniques and programs,” provided an overview of approaches for working with different types of needs, helping educators choose the most appropriate techniques. Teachers also explored different tools for working with children with SEN based on real cases, allowing them to select and adapt methods for specific situations. The module and the entire training concluded with the development of IEP for real students, which gave participants the opportunity to apply their knowledge and demonstrate approaches to creating individualized programs. The program participants were divided into 10 groups of 3 people each and were engaged in the development of IEP on the basis of specific students from their school. The defense of the IEP projects took place the next day, where each group presented their projects in the format of 15-minute presentations followed by a question and answer session from the audience. After the successful defense, the participants were presented with certificates of completion of the training program within the framework of the pilot project (Appendix 2).

Data Analysis

At the end of each session, speakers wrote a report stating the purpose of their training, describing the content of the training, and reflecting on the participants' feedback during the sessions. After analyzing these reports, the research team came to these conclusions:

1. Analysis of the first session:

Based on the speaker's report and feedback from the study participants, the first session was a challenging one to start the program, as it touched on deeply specialized topics related to inclusive education and SEN (special educational needs). As a reminder, the initial topic of the first module was entitled: 'Specifics of working with pupils with SEN. Planning for diversity (resources, AI, etc.)." In her feedback, the speaker indicated: “This topic was a bit broad for the first part, as the teachers had not yet familiarized themselves with the basics and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, it was a bit difficult for some to go into depth right away.” Also, based on the participants' feedback, it was found that the topic was too broad as it covered a lot of things, namely key aspects of working with pupils with special educational needs (SEN), including individualized approach, differentiated tasks, principles of universal design and adapted assessment methods, teachers did not have enough time to discuss some aspects with the expert.  Consequently, moving it to the end of the first module and dividing it into two parts will allow participants to master complex material more smoothly. This step logically organizes the learning process from basic concepts to specialized aspects.

2. Deepening of the first module:

After analyzing the speakers' reports and participants' feedback, it was revealed that educators did not have a sufficiently deep knowledge of the legal aspects of inclusive education. In his report, the speaker noted that this topic is fundamental, as it introduces the normative provisions of inclusive education, in particular, the right to choose educational organizations taking into account the child's wishes and abilities, state standards and the legal status of IEP. Thus, the introduction of the training “UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” in more depth, with the addition of other documents such as “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, “UN Convention on the Rights of the Child”, at the very beginning of the program will allow teachers to realize the importance of inclusion and better understand its legal framework. In addition, in his report, the speaker noted that he had noticed a lack of awareness of teachers about the rights of children and teachers themselves at the level of the education system, as well as their agreement that the mechanisms for assessing the educational needs of students are not sufficiently developed, which leads to conflicts between schools and parents, therefore, the extension of the training to 90 minutes will provide a more detailed discussion of international and national standards.

3. Clarification of the topic of inclusive education:

The analysis of the feedback from the research participants and the speaker's observations showed that many participants did not understand the essence of inclusive education well enough, confusing it with integration. In their answers and during the practical tasks at the trainings, teachers often believed that it is necessary to adapt the child to the requirements of the school system, which is the basis of integration. Whereas inclusion is about creating conditions for overcoming barriers. Therefore, it was decided to change the theme of the session “Components of Inclusive Education” to a more fundamental and detailed one - “Inclusive Education”, and to extend the time for studying this topic. This will allow more attention to be paid to the basic principles of inclusive education and a deeper understanding of the differences between inclusion and integration, which is critical for successful application of knowledge in practice.

4. Optimization of the second module:

It is important to note that taking into account the reports of the speakers of the second module and the feedback from the participants, the topics of the trainings in this module were very useful for the trainers as they helped to develop the necessary leadership skills. In this regard, a small number of changes were made regarding the duration of the trainings. For example, the emphasis on collaboration in the session “Coordination and Collaboration between Teachers, Support Staff and Parents” will facilitate more effective interaction and understanding of the roles of each participant in the educational process. Extending this session to 120 minutes would also allow more time for practical exercises and discussions.

5. Renaming and clarification of topics:

In the process of analyzing the speaker's report of the “Soft skills” training, it was revealed that many teachers did not understand the meaning of the title as they were not familiar with the types of soft skills. Whereas in their feedback the participants mentioned that they were preparing for a difficult and serious topic because they did not understand the title, hence they were a bit wary and unfavorable. That is, it should be assumed that renaming this training to a more understandable language for teachers will have a positive impact on their perception and attitude towards this session. Therefore, renaming this training to “Formation of teacher's professional competencies: creative and critical thinking, communication skills, time management” will make the topic and its content more accessible to the participants, given that many teachers were not familiar with the terminology. This will give all participants a clear understanding of the skills they can develop.

6. Use of digital technologies:

Taking into account the speaker's report of the training “Digital Solutions for Inclusive Education”, it was revealed that the use of IT in inclusive education has great potential to improve the educational process. Educators are interested in further exploring and applying IT solutions to create inclusion through virtual spaces and assistive technologies for children with SEN, but lack of time did not allow educators to fully master and understand how to use the proposed platforms to work with children with autism and other special needs. Based on this, extending the training by 240 minutes will ensure a deeper understanding of the technologies and platforms needed for inclusive education.

7. Rearrangement of topics in the third module:

Analyzing the reports of the speakers of the third module and taking into account the teachers' feedback, we noticed that the sessions from narrow specialists proved to be difficult to grasp. The recommendations presented were quite in-depth and teachers needed more time and training to put them into practice. In their feedback, the study participants indicated that they would like to focus more on the methods and technologies used in working with children with SEN. Therefore, to begin with, in the third module, teachers should be given the opportunity to familiarize themselves with a number of methods and tools, analyze their effectiveness, and only at the end add training on practical recommendations from specialists. Thus, replacing the topics “Practical recommendations of a rehabilitation therapist in working with children with MSD” and “Practical recommendations of a neuropsychologist in working with children with SEN” with “Understanding SEN in children, methods and programs” will help to establish a stronger base before more in-depth recommendations from specialists. This will enable teachers to familiarize themselves with the basics first before moving on to specific methods and tools.

8. Improvement of project preparation and defense:

The problem of lack of time for project development and defense was noticed during the analysis. In their feedback, teachers mentioned that they did not have time to fully prepare for the defense because they had only two or three hours to prepare. It is recommended to conduct a training session on “Developing IEP” in the middle of the third module to give teachers more time to prepare and create a comfortable environment for the defense. This would also include inviting sub-specialists for consultation to help teachers make adjustments to their projects.

9. Feedback and support:

It is important to provide opportunities for teachers to receive feedback from speakers during the training process, which will improve the quality of trainings and help participants feel more confident in their knowledge and skills.

10. Conclusion:

The teacher training program needs structural and substantive improvements to help create a deeper understanding of inclusive education. The changes made, such as reallocating topics, increasing session time and focusing on practical aspects, will provide more effective training and support for teachers, which in turn will lead to improved quality of the educational process for children with SEN.

Recommendations for improving the training program for teachers.

As a post-training follow-up, one of the research team members visited the school at the end of the first quarter to collect feedback from teachers based on the knowledge and tools gained during the training. In order to collect data, the researcher visited the lessons of some of the teachers who had been trained and also held roundtable meetings with all the teachers, where everyone shared their thoughts and experiences in using the knowledge and tools they had learned.

Given the experience of the trainings, the project team recommends expanding the training program by deepening the topics, according to the strategy from global to specific. Based on the analysis of the speakers' reports, participants' feedback and the observations of the research team, an updated program with a duration of three weeks was drawn up. This process allowed taking into account all aspects and suggestions identified during the event, as well as optimizing the content and structure of the program to improve its effectiveness and accessibility. The recommended training program is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Recommended training program for teachers

Conclusion

Summing up, final recommendations developed to optimize the program, its structure and practical applicability for participants:

1. Adjusting the sequence of trainings. It is recommended to start the program with training on “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, “UN Convention on the Rights of the Child”, “UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” to understand the legal framework of inclusive education. Then topics on basic aspects, gradually moving on to more complex issues like “Planning for Diversity” and “Working with pupils with SEN” so that participants get to grips with the basics and can go into more detail.
2. Increase the length of key sessions. Increase the length of rich training sessions to 90-120 minutes, and for topics that require detailed discussion and practice, such as “Digital Solutions and Assistive Technology,” allocate up to 240 minutes.
3. Strengthening the theoretical base. In the early stages, add introductory information on the differences between integration and inclusion, as well as general research frameworks to prepare for the Action Research topic.
4. Increased emphasis on collaborations. Module 2 sessions on collaboration should cover more of the coordination between teachers, support staff, and parents that is critical in creating IEP.
5. Time Management Recommendations. Organize comfortable intervals between complex trainings to reflect on the material and create time windows for feedback.
6. Gradual deepening of the material. Start the third module with an overview of SEN topics and then move on to highly specialized topics to move logically from theory to practice.
7. Extend and improve the project defense process. Start developing the IEP earlier in the process, with gaps for revision and feedback.
8. Practical orientation. More cases and practical tasks for trainings on adapting materials and assessing children with SEN.
9. Feedback and support for participants. Include regular feedback sessions and post-training consultations to consolidate knowledge.

These recommendations aim to improve the structure and accessibility of the program, making it more practical to implement. The program itself is oriented to meet the current needs of teachers seeking to improve their qualifications in the field of inclusive education and work with children with special educational needs. In the modern conditions of inclusion teachers face new challenges that require not only adaptation of teaching material, but also the development of individual approaches that allow each student to maximize his or her potential. Taking into account these tasks, the program includes topics reflecting the most relevant areas of pedagogical support and remedial work, as well as topics aimed at the development of leadership qualities and skills of teachers. The thematic material of the program is based on the latest research, which ensures its relevance and scientific validity.

The program is focused on practical application and integration of knowledge into the educational process, which makes it valuable for teachers who want to improve their effectiveness in the classroom. Methodological recommendations and practical tools included in the training modules have been developed taking into account the real conditions in which educators work and correspond to their professional needs.

References

Brydon-Miller, M., & Maguire, P. (2009). Participatory action research: Contributions to the development of practitioner inquiry in education. Educational Action Research, 17(1), 79 – 93.

Makoelle, T. M., & Burmistrova, V. (2021). Teacher education and inclusive education in Kazakhstan. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1889048

Makoelle, T. M., Hernández-Torrano, D., Somerton, M., & Yakavets, N. (2023). Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Kazakhstani Schools. In C. McLaughlin, L. Winter, & N. Yakavets (Eds.), Mapping Educational Change in Kazakhstan (pp. 75–92). Cambridge University Press.

Miettinen, R. (2000). The concept of experiential learning and John Dewey’s theory of reflective thought and action. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(1), 54–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/026013700293458

UNICEF. (2022). Training, inspiring and motivating early grade teachers to strengthen children’s skills in literacy and numeracy. https://www.unicef.org/media/124501/file/Sierra%20Leone%20case%20study%20FLN.pdf 

Appendix 1.

Appendix 2.

Training program for teachers.