IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Student Diversity and School Climate in the Mediterranean Zone: A
Comparative Study
F. Sehkar Fayda-Kinik
Istanbul Technical University
Turkey51

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Abstract
This study aimed to identify the extent student diversity and school climate vary within andacross France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey, to investigate and compare the impact of student
diversity on school climate in the selected Mediterranean countries. A quantitative research
design was adopted by using the data of 41,789 teachers obtained from the dataset of the
Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018. The research questions andhypotheses were formulated to investigate the extent of student diversity and school climate
variations within and across the selected countries. Accordingly, the variability of generalschool climate, teacher-student relations, teaching experience in multicultural classrooms,
teachers’ self-efficacy in multicultural classrooms, the presence of students from various ethnic
backgrounds, and diversity practices were tested in the schools of France, Italy, Spain, andTurkey in the research model. Statistical analyses, including chi-square and t-tests, ANOVA,
and multiple regression analysis, were conducted to test the hypotheses and examine therelationships between student diversity and school climate. The findings revealed significant
variations in student diversity and school climate within and across the participating countries,and evident relationships between student diversity and school climate were discovered andcompared among the selected Mediterranean countries. This study contributes to theknowledge base of educational policymakers, administrators, practitioners, and teachers by
guiding them in creating inclusive and supportive learning environments that promote positive
student experiences and academic success and suggesting the need for policies and practices
that support inclusive education and foster positive school climates in multicultural classrooms.
Keywords: learning environment, Mediterranean countries, school climate, student diversity,
TALIS 2018

52

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Student diversity has emerged as a key component of educational policies and systems aroundthe world in today’s more connected and diverse world. Diversity in terms of ethnicity andculture is more prevalent than ever in classrooms for both teachers and students, which makes
the Western world “more culturally and ethnically diverse” (Dubbeld et al., 2019). A diverse
student body that represents a range of cultural, linguistic, ethnic, socioeconomic, and ability
backgrounds presents educational institutions with both opportunities and challenges.
According to Kaplan and Bista (2022), to embrace (or even to celebrate) diversity, a schoolcommunity must go beyond mere tolerance and actively value diversity, which entails
developing a mindset where diversity is viewed not as a weakness and a challenge but rather
as a strength and something to be valued for teachers, students, and their families. Therefore,
it is crucial to comprehend how student diversity affects school climate because it is a key
factor in promoting a supportive and inclusive learning environment. A supportive andwelcoming school environment with a diverse climate fosters student engagement, academic
success, social and emotional well-being, and intergroup relations (Thapa et al., 2013; Ulbricht
et al., 2022).
There are many facets to the relationship between student diversity and school climate. The
variety of perspectives, experiences, and skills that students bring to the classroom enhances
the learning environment. Students feel valued, respected, and included when diversity isembraced and appreciated in the classroom (Iglesias-Diaz & Romero-Perez, 2021). The
engagement of students and collaboration among them are increased by a supportive learning
environment provided through a positive school climate, which also lessens incidents ofvictimization among students of different ethnic backgrounds (Caravita et al., 2020; Konold etal., 2017).
Despite the widely acknowledged value of student diversity and school climate, the precise
relationship between these elements has been changing as the world has faced some
unprecedented impacts of transformation resulting from political, technological, sociocultural,and socioeconomic reasons. In the context of the countries in the Mediterranean region selected
for this research; namely, France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey, there is a research gap providing acomparison of student diversity and school climate between these countries clarifying how
student diversity varies within and between these nations and how it affects the school
environment. To address this gap, this study contributes to the literature by determining thevariability of student diversity and school climate within and among these countries, as well as
investigating and contrasting the effect of student diversity on school climate.
Therefore, this study aimed to identify the extent student diversity and school climate vary
within and across France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey, to investigate and compare the impact ofstudent diversity on school climate in these selected Mediterranean countries. The examinationof these connections would advance knowledge of how student diversity and school climate
interact in the Mediterranean region and offer insightful information to educational
policymakers, administrators, practitioners, and teachers.

53

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Literature Review
Student Diversity
Diversity in education can be described as a difference or “unlikeness” between particularpeople or social groups (Pollock & Briscoe, 2020). It is multifaceted, may relate to tangible
aspects or intangible ones, such as cultural practices, and is rational in light of the boundaries
established by various social groups (Cerna et al., 2021). Student diversity is the inclusion of
students from a range of socioeconomic, racial, linguistic, cultural, and ability backgrounds in“a learning environment in which curriculum, pedagogy, and outreach are all consistent with abroadly conceptualized multicultural philosophy” (Nieto & Bode, 2018, p. 39). It comprises avariety of unique traits, stories, and identities contributing to the diverse content of the student
body.
Student diversity is critical to creating a dynamic and inviting learning environment for all
students. There are many significant benefits to having diverse student populations in schools.
It promotes intercultural understanding and respect among students in the first place and fosters
a rich exchange of cultures (Davis et al., 2022). Students who are exposed to various
viewpoints, cultures, and languages grow in their understanding of the world and become more
prepared to live and work in diverse societies. Additionally, diverse classrooms can improvestudents’ critical thinking, creativity, problem-solving, and academic performance (Dawes etal., 2020; Rasheed et al., 2020). Therefore, it is crucial to foster an environment in schools thatvalues and respects diversity, which can be accomplished by incorporating multicultural
curricula, attracting and retaining diverse educators, and offering culturally sensitive teaching
methods.
School Climate
School climate is defined as the social, emotional, and physical environment of a school that
influences the overall learning and well-being of students, staff, and the school community(Thapa et al., 2013; Voight & Nation, 2016). It represents the norms, values, and beliefs thatshape the school community as experienced by students, parents, and school personnel (Cohenet al., 2009). It includes elements such as the quality of interactions between students and staff,
the degree of safety and inclusivity, the existence of supportive policies and practices, and thegeneral sense of engagement and belonging among the school community.
School climate, an essential element of the learning environment, has been connected to both
positive and negative student outcomes. Supportive relationships, inclusive behaviours, and afeeling of belonging are typical indicators of a positive school climate. Therefore, students who
experience an optimal educational environment tend to perform better academically (Wang &Degol, 2016), demonstrate enhanced social-emotional well-being (Aldridge et al., 2016) and
improved mental health outcomes (Lewno-Dumdie et al., 2020; Wang & Degol, 2016).
However, an unsupportive school environment can have negative effects on students, including
higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms (Holt et al., 2016; Konishi et al.,54

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

2010); lower academic motivation, decreased school attendance, and higher dropout rates(Thapa et al., 2013; Wang & Degol, 2016). It is important to develop and promote supportive
learning environments that contribute to the success and well-being of all students to lessen theeffects of a negative school climate on student outcomes.
Relationship Between Student Diversity and School Climate
Student diversity has a significant impact on the overall school climate by shaping student
experiences socially, emotionally, and academically. In diverse schools, the interactions
between students from different backgrounds can contribute to a more inclusive and tolerantschool climate, fostering positive attitudes toward diversity, reducing prejudice, and enhancing
intercultural understanding (Cerna et al., 2021; Cohen & Lotan, 2014; Schwarzenthal et al.,2020). Diverse student populations enable the creation of rich and active learning environmentsthat value diversity and promote the growth of key abilities for navigating an environment thatis becoming progressively diverse. Schools can create an inviting and encouraging educationalsetting for all students that supports both their overall well-being and academic success byembracing and valuing student diversity.
Numerous studies have examined the relationship between student diversity and school
climate, highlighting the importance of fostering inclusive and positive environments fordiverse student populations. Gromova et al. (2021) emphasized the importance of an accepting
school environment for elementary school students who are immigrants to Russia. According
to Dubbeld et al. (2019), it was reported that teachers’ multicultural attitudes and their opinionsof the school’s policies and culture were linked to burnout by highlighting the importance of a
supportive school environment for the well-being of students from different backgrounds.
Similarly, Shirazi (2018) underlined the significance of school climate in fostering sociopolitical inclusion and a sense of belonging for diverse student populations. Additionally,
Iglesias-Diaz and Romero-Perez (2021) conducted a systematic review that demonstrated thebeneficial effects of inclusive classrooms on adolescent well-being by emphasizing theimportance of a supportive school climate in meeting students’ diverse social and emotional
needs. Thus, it is important to develop welcoming environments at schools that value diversity
among students and foster positive social interactions. Schools can give all students, regardlessof background or identity, a sense of belonging, safety, and well-being by developing anenvironment that values diversity. These results highlight the significance of taking student
diversity into account as a key element in determining the school climate and the demand forinclusive education policies and practices that cater to the particular needs of diverse student
populations.
Methodology
Research Design
A quantitative research model was adopted in the study to identify the extent student diversity
and school climate vary within and across France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey, to investigate and55

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

compare the impact of student diversity on school climate in the selected Mediterraneancountries. The research questions (RQs) were constructed below in line with the quantitative
methodology:
RQ1. To what extent does student diversity vary within and across participating
countries?
RQ2. To what extent does school climate vary within and across participating countries?
RQ3. What relationships are evident between student diversity and school climate inschools in selected Mediterranean countries?
Based on these RQs, the following hypotheses were formulated to quantitatively test various
aspects of student diversity and school climate in the Mediterranean zone in the study:
H1: The general school climate varies across countries.
H2: Teacher-student relationships vary across countries.
H3: Teaching experience in multicultural classrooms varies across countries.
H3.1: The general school climate in countries differs based on teaching experiencein multicultural classrooms.
H3.2: Teacher-student relationships in countries differ based on teaching experiencein multicultural classrooms.
H4: The self-efficacy of teachers teaching multicultural classrooms varies acrosscountries.
H5: The presence of students from multiple ethnic backgrounds in the school varies
across countries.
H5.1: The general school climate in countries differs based on the presence ofstudents from multiple ethnic backgrounds in the school.
H5.2: Teacher-student relationships in countries differ based on the presence ofstudents from multiple ethnic backgrounds in the school.
H6: Diversity practices vary across countries.
H6.1: Diversity practices have a positive impact on the general school climate.
H6.2: Diversity practices have a positive impact on teacher-student relationships.
Regarding the RQs and the hypotheses developed above, the research model of the study isillustrated in Figure 1.

56

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Figure 1
The Research Design

As depicted in Figure 1, the primary objectives of this study were to understand and compare
the differences in student diversity (RQ1), school climate (RQ2), and diversity in schools in
the Mediterranean region (RQ3). Accordingly, the variability of general school climate (H1),teacher-student relations (H2), teaching experience in multicultural classrooms (H3: H3.1, H3.2),
teachers’ self-efficacy in multicultural classrooms (H4), the presence of students from various
ethnic backgrounds (H5: H5.1, H5.2), and diversity practices (H6: H6.1, H6.2) were tested in theschools of France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey in the research model.
Participating Countries
The sample of the study was determined from the internationally collected data of the Teachingand Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018 obtained from the OECD TALIS 2018
database (OECD, 2018a). The main goal of the TALIS is to offer reliable international
indicators and analysis on teachers and teaching that is relevant to policymaking to assist
nations and economies in reviewing and developing legislation that can foster beneficial
conditions for both teaching and learning (Price & Carstens, 2020) over certain themes
including diversity and school climate (Ainley & Carstens, 2018). Based on the availability
and compatibility of the data, the participating countries were selected as France (FRA), Italy(ITA), Spain (SPA), and Turkey (TUR) located on the southern European coast representing
the Mediterranean region. According to the World Bank (2021), the world’s economies wereclassified into four groups of low, lower-middle, upper-middle, and high-income countries.
Accordingly, France, Italy, and Spain were determined as high-income economies ($13,205 ormore) whereas Turkey was labelled as an upper-middle-income economy ($4,256 to $13,205)
in the Mediterranean zone. Other than geographical and economic backgrounds, thesecountries show similarities in rich cultural heritage, migration flows they experience, theinfluence of multiculturalism, educational policies, focus on inclusive education, and efforts
for intercultural understanding.

57

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

After the identification and extraction of the data belonging to France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey,
the sample of the study comprised 41,789 teachers as listed in Table 1.
Table 1
Demographics of the Participating Countries
Country
France

Italy

Spain

TurkeyGenderFemaleMale
Total
FemaleMale
Total
FemaleMale
Total
Female
Male
Total

TOTAL

n
3,198
1,237
4,435
2,809
803
3,612
10,161
4,492
14,653
10,017
9,072
19,08941,789

%
72.1%
27.9%
10.6
77.8%
22.2%
8.6
69.3%
30.7%
35.1
52.5%
47.5%
45.7
100.0

As presented in Table 1, of 41,789 teachers in the study sample, 4,435 participants were from
France (10.6%), 3,612 from Italy (8.6%), 14,653 from Spain (35.1%), and 19,089 from Turkey(45.7%). Regarding the distribution of teachers by gender, the teachers surveyed in Francecomprised 3,198 female teachers, corresponding to 72.1% of the entire teacher population in
the country sample, and 1,237 male participants, roughly 27.9% of the total. Out of a total of
3,612 teachers in Italy, 2,809 participants, making up about 77.8% of the teacher sample in the
country were female while the number was 803 for male teachers, accounting for
approximately 22.2% of the total. In Spain, female participants totalled 10,161, corresponding
to 69.3% of the total teacher sample in the country; on the other hand, male teachers numbered
4,492, representing around 30.7% of the total. Finally, the study sample from Turkey
constituted a majority with 10,017 female participants, accounting for approximately 52.5% of
the total teacher sample in the country; in contrast, male teachers numbered 9,072 making up
approximately 47.5% of the total.
Research Instrument
The teacher questionnaire of TALIS 2018 was used as the research instrument in the study(OECD, 2018b). The questions analysed in the study were selected from OECD (2019) as
TQ44, TQ45, TQ46, TQ47, TQ48, and TQ49 in line with the RQs. TQ44 captured whether
teachers taught in classrooms with students from different cultures, with options for “Yes/No”
whereas TQ45(A,B,C,D,E) examined the extent to which teachers coped with challenges, adapted
teaching, ensured collaboration among students from different backgrounds, raised awareness58

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

for cultural differences, and reduced ethnic stereotyping in culturally diverse classrooms, witha range from “not at all” to “a lot”. TQ46 assessed whether the school included students from
more than one cultural or ethnic background, and TQ47(A,B,C,D) explored the implementation ofdiversity practices, offering options of “Yes/No”. TQ48(A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H) evaluated aspects ofschool climate, including staff and parental participation, shared responsibility, collaborative
culture, shared beliefs, consistent enforcement of rules, and encouragement of staff-led
initiatives while TQ49(A,B,C,D,E) measured the agreement levels regarding teachers and students
getting along well, teachers valuing student well-being, teacher interest in student opinions,provision of extra assistance, and teacher reliance on each other, with a 4-point Likert scale.
The results of the reliability analyses for TQ48 and TQ49 indicated that the Cronbach’s Alphavalue of the general school climate (TQ48) was calculated as 0.840 for FRA, 0.843 for ITA,
0.901 for SPA, and 0.941for TUR; in addition, regarding teacher-student relations (TQ49), it
was detected as 0.812 for FRA, 0.811 for ITA, 0.839 for SPA, and 0.868 for TUR, which all
validates the reliability of the research instrument.
Data Analysis
In the study, several statistical analyses were employed on SPSS for Windows 26.0 to explore
different aspects of student diversity and school climate based on the views of teachers fromdifferent countries. Therefore, the data specifically determined to be used were extracted fromthe OECD TALIS 2018 database depending on the RQs and hypotheses developed in the study(OECD, 2018a). First, frequency analyses were conducted to establish the sample profile.
Subsequently, to determine the reliability coefficients of the variables of TQ48 and TQ49,
Cronbach’s Alpha values were calculated for each participating country. Next, the chi-square
test of independence to identify whether teaching in multicultural classrooms and countries
randomly occurs together or whether there is an actual relationship in addition to independent
samples t-test to identify differences between groups for the variables with two categories were
performed to test H3, H3.1, H3.2, H5, H5.1, H5.2, and H6. Regarding the variables with more than
two groups, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed to detect group differences to test
H1, H2, and H4. Based on the results of the ANOVA, post hoc tests were conducted to determine
which specific pairs of groups differed from each other (H1, H2, and H4). Finally, multiple
regression analysis was used to investigate the impact of diversity practices on the generalschool climate and teacher-student relationships to test H6.1 and H6.2.
Results
Student Diversity Within and Across Participating Countries
To investigate RQ1 about the variability of student diversity, H3, H4, H5, and H6 were tested at
this phase. First, the chi-square test of independence was utilized to identify if there might bea relationship between teaching in multicultural classrooms and countries. Table 2 represents
the proportion of respondents in each country who reported teaching in a classroom with59

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

students from different cultures (TQ44) and the percentage of classrooms and schools in eachcountry with a diverse cultural or ethnic student population (TQ46).
Table 2
Variability of Student Diversity and Teaching in Multicultural Classrooms by Country
Items
Taught classroom with students
from different cultures (TQ44)

France
Yes
No

Italy
Yes
No

Spain
Yes
No

TurkeyYesNo

63.8% 36.2% 70.2% 29.8% 81.6% 18.4% 45.7% 54.3%
χ2=4619.101; p<.001

School includes students of morethan one cultural or ethnic
background (TQ46)

71.3% 28.7% 85.7% 14.3% 89.9% 10.1% 48.6% 51.4%
χ2=7049.195; p<.001

As observed in Table 2, the stark differences in the percentages between countries indicatedvarying levels of exposure to multicultural classrooms among the teaching population. Spainand Italy had a relatively higher percentage of classrooms with such diversity while France andTurkey had a lower proportion (H3: accepted). Regarding the percentage of classrooms andschools in each country that had a diverse cultural or ethnic student population (TQ46), France,
Italy, Spain, and Turkey had different levels of cultural diversity in their educational settings,
with Spain and Italy having the highest percentages of classrooms and schools with students
from different cultures or ethnic backgrounds (H5: accepted).
Subsequently, the variability of diversity practices (TQ47) was examined as part of RQ1 to test
H6. The results of the chi-square test of independence are presented in Table 3.
Table 3
Variability of Diversity Practices by Country
TQ47

France
Yes
No

Italy
Yes
No

Spain
Yes
No

TurkeyYes
No

Encourage students’ expression ofdiverse cultural identities

47.8% 52.2% 57.2% 42.8% 66.6% 33.4% 42.5% 57.5%

Organising multicultural events

χ2=1347.998; p<.001
27.7% 72.3% 33.2% 66.8% 48.1% 51.9% 27.5% 72.5%
χ2=1150.860; p<.001

Teaching students how to deal withethnic and cultural discrimination

79.5% 20.5% 67.7% 32.3% 80.0% 20.0% 54.6% 45.4%
χ2=1796.629; p<.001

Adopting practices that integrate
global themes via curriculum

65.8% 34.2% 76.2% 23.8% 76.8% 23.2% 52.0% 48.0%
χ2=1622.127; p<.001

60

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

As illustrated in Table 3, Spain had the highest percentage (66.60%) for encouraging students
to express their diverse cultural identities, preceded by Italy (57.20%), France (47.80%), andTurkey (42.50%). As for organizing multicultural events, Spain also had the greatest proportion(48.10%), followed by Italy (33.20%), France (27.70%), and Turkey (27.50%). Concerningteaching students how to deal with ethnic and cultural discrimination, France had the highest
percentage (79.50%), followed by Spain (80.00%), Italy (67.70%), and Turkey (54.60%). In
terms of adopting practices that incorporate global themes into the curriculum, Spain had thehighest percentage (76.80%), preceded by Italy (76.20%), France (65.80%), and Turkey(52.0%). Evidently, Spain tended to excel in encouraging cultural expression and organizing
multicultural events whereas France stood out for addressing ethnic and cultural
discrimination. Italy was notable for incorporating global themes into curricula. Turkey had
comparatively lower percentages across all categories, suggesting a relatively lower emphasison these diversity practices compared to the other countries listed (H6: accepted).
Finally, ANOVA was conducted to determine the variability of teachers’ self-efficacy inmulticultural classrooms by country to test H4. The ANOVA test is a statistical tool used todetermine whether there are any statistically significant differences between the means of threeor more independent groups. The results of the analysis are demonstrated in Table 4.
Table 4
Variability of Teachers’ Self-efficacy in Multicultural Classrooms by Country

Country

Cope with
Adapt teaching
challenges of ato cultural
multicultural
diversity ofclassroom
students(TQ45A)(TQ45B)

Ensure thatstudents with
w/out migration
background work
together(TQ45C)FranceItaly
Spain
TurkeyF(p)2.727 ± 0.598
2.838 ± 0.486
2.695 ± 0.650
2.673 ± 0.514
88.332 (0.000)

3.305 ± 0.588
2.971 ± 0.730
3.126 ± 0.636
2.852 ± 0.612
895.209 (0.000)

DifferenceAll2.704 ± 0.664
2.857 ± 0.497
2.692 ± 0.661
2.647 ± 0.514
133.087(0.000)All except
FRA and SPA

All

Raise
awareness for
culturaldifferencesamongststudents(TQ45D)2.970 ± 0.702
3.335 ± 0.534
3.070 ± 0.686
2.899 ± 0.529
606.736(0.000)All

Reduce ethnic
stereotyping
amongststudents(TQ45E)
3.188 ± 0.638
3.335 ± 0.584
3.255 ± 0.638
3.169 ± 0.508
118.824(0.000)All

In Table 4, it was indicated that all 5 sub-dimensions that made up teacher self-efficacy varied
according to countries (p<0.05 for TQ45A, TQ45B, TQ45C, TQ45D, and TQ45E). After
conducting an ANOVA test, post hoc comparisons are used when ANOVA indicates that there
are significant differences between group means. The purpose is to pinpoint exactly whichgroups differ from each other because ANOVA only explains that there is a significant
difference among the groups but does not specify in which pairs it exists. Therefore, post hoc
tests are performed to identify the specific pairs of groups with significant differences in theirmeans and provide a more detailed understanding of the data. Therefore, Tukey post hoc

61

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

analysis was carried out to reveal the source of this difference for each sub-dimension. The
results detected significant differences among the countries for all of the sub-dimensions ofteachers’ self-efficacy in multicultural classrooms (all p-values<.001). Post hoc comparisonsproved that there were significant differences between all countries for the dimensions of“coping with challenges of a multicultural classroom”, “adapting teaching to cultural diversityof students”, “ensuring that students with/without migration background work together”,“raising awareness for cultural differences among students”, and “reducing ethnic stereotyping
among students”. Specifically, France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey showed statistically significant
differences in all of the five sub-dimensions compared to each other. However, France andSpain did not differ significantly from each other and were distinct from the other countries inall sub-dimensions except the adaptation of teaching to the cultural diversity of students.
Teachers from Italy had the highest self-efficacy in “coping with challenges of a multiculturalclassroom”, while teachers from France were the best among other countries in “ensuring thatstudents with/without migration background work together”. Italian teachers were good at
raising awareness for cultural differences amongst students” and “reducing ethnic stereotyping
amongst students” (H4: accepted).
School Climate Within and Across Participating Countries
ANOVA was conducted to examine the variability of general school climate (H1) and teacherstudent relations (H2) across different countries to address RQ2. For the general school climate,a significant difference was found among the countries (F(3.41785)=54.822; p<.001). Therefore,
post hoc comparisons proved that there were significant differences between all countries as
demonstrated in Table 5.
Table 5
Variability of School Climate by Country
Items

Country

France
Italy
General School Climate
Spain(TQ48)
TurkeyTotal
FranceItaly
Teacher-Student Relations
Spain(TQ49)
Turkey
Total

n

X̄

SD

F

4,435 2.801 0.464 54.822
3,612 2.815 0.427
14,653 2.907 0.534
19,089 2.879 0.626
41,789 2.875 0.565
4,435 3.266 0.441 481.272
3,612 3.157 0.430
14,653 3.311 0.461
19,089 3.118 0.516
41,789 3.205 0.491p
0.000
Difference
All except
FRA and ITA
0.000
DifferenceAll

Accordingly, France had the lowest mean score (X̄=2.801) whereas Spain had the highest meanscore (X̄ = 2.907) for the general school climate. All the countries except France and Italy
differed significantly from each other in terms of the general school climate (H1: accepted).

62

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Regarding teacher-student relations, a significant difference was also observed among thecountries (F(3.41785)=481.272; p<.001). Post hoc comparisons indicated that there weresignificant differences between all the countries. Turkey had the lowest mean score (X̄=3.118)
while Spain had the highest mean score (X̄=3.311) for teacher-student relations. All thecountries differed significantly from each other in terms of teacher-student relations (H2:
accepted).
Evident Relationships Between Student Diversity and School Climate by Country
To address RQ3, the variability of student diversity according to school climate wasinvestigated through the independent sample t-test (H3.1, H3.2, H5.1, and H5.2), and the effect ofstudent diversity on school climate was examined via multiple regression analysis (H6.1 andH6.2). The independent samples t-test is a statistical method used to compare the means of two
independent groups to determine if there is a significant difference between them whereas
multiple regression analysis explores the relationship between one dependent variable andmultiple independent variables to understand how each independent variable contributes tochanges in the dependent variable. First, the independent sample t-test was used to determine
whether the general school climate differs according to teaching experience in multiculturalclassrooms, and the results are presented in Table 6.
Table 6
Variability of General School Climate According to Teaching in Multicultural Classrooms
TQ48 /Country
FranceItaly
Spain
TurkeyTeaching ExperiencenX̄ ± SDt (p)in Multicultural Classrooms
Yes
2,682 2.805 ± 0.486 1.414 (0.157)
No
1,523 2.784 ± 0.457
Yes
2,472 2.822 ± 0.426 -1.298 (0.194)
No1,050 2.792 ± 0.445
Yes
11,819 2.917 ± 0.537 1.888 (0.059)
No2,663 2.861 ± 0.533
Yes
8,618 2.863 ± 0.638 1.028 (0.304)
No10,253 2.892 ± 0.620

As observed in Table 6, school climate did not vary according to teaching experience inmulticultural classes (p>0.05) (H3.1: rejected). Next, the independent sample t-test was used todetermine whether the teacher-student relationship differs according to teaching in
multicultural classrooms, and the results are demonstrated in Table 7.

63

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Table 7
Variability of Teacher-student Relations According to Teaching in Multicultural Classrooms
TQ49 /Country
FranceItaly
Spain
TurkeyTeaching ExperiencenX̄ ± SDt (p)in Multicultural Classrooms
Yes
2,682 3.263 ± 0.451 4.916 (0.000)
No1,523 3.282 ± 0.455
Yes
2,472 3.161 ± 0.438 -3.538 (0.000)
No1,050 3.144 ± 0.429
Yes
11,819 3.306 ± 0.465 -3.098 (0.002)
No2,663 3.341 ± 0.454
Yes
8,618 3.110 ± 0.527 -1.713 (0.087)
No
10,253 3.123 ± 0.509

As evident in Table 7, the teacher-student relationship in Turkey did not vary according toteaching experience in multicultural classrooms (p>0.05). On the other hand, the teacherstudent relationship in Italy was more positive if the teacher was experienced in teaching in
multicultural classrooms (p<0.05). Conversely, in France and Spain, the teacher-student
relationship declined the variability of teaching experience in multicultural classrooms (H3.2:
partially accepted).
Moreover, the independent sample t-test was used to determine the variability of the generalschool climate according to whether there is more than one ethnic student in the school, andthe results are listed in Table 8.
Table 8
Variability of General School Climate According to the Presence of More Than One Ethnicity
in the School
TQ48 /Country
FranceItaly
Spain
TurkeyPresence of more than one ethnicitynX̄ ± SDt (p)in the schoolYes
2,988 2.801 ± 0.489 0.943 (0.346)
No
1,203 2.787 ± 0.442
Yes
3,022 2.814 ± 0.420 0.146 (0.884)No504 2.811 ± 0.500
Yes
13,013 2.916 ± 0.535 6.026 (0.000)
No1,464 2.827 ± 0.548
Yes
9,186 2.835 ± 0.636 -9.253 (0.000)
No
9,710 2.920 ± 0.619

In Table 8, it was detected that the general school climate in France and Italy did not varydepending on whether there were students from more than one ethnicity in the school (p>0.05).
On the other hand, the presence of students from more than one ethnicity in Spain increased
the general school climate whereas it decreased in Turkey (H5.1: partially accepted). The

64

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

independent sample t-test was also used to determine the variability of the teacher-student
relationship according to whether there are students from more than one ethnic origin in theschool, and the results of the analysis are demonstrated in Table 9.
Table 9Variability of Teacher-student Relationship According to the Presence of More Than One
Ethnicity in the School
TQ49 /Country
FranceItaly
Spain
TurkeyPresence of more than one ethnicitynX̄ ± SDt (p)in the schoolYes
2,988 3.266 ± 0.449 -0.850 (0.395)
No1,203 3.279 ± 0.462
Yes
3,022 3.152 ± 0.432 -1.360 (0.174)
No504 3.180 ± 0.453
Yes
13,013 3.313 ± 0.462 0.136 (0.892)
No1,464 3.311 ± 0.470
Yes
9,186 3.093 ± 0.518 -6.294 (0.000)
No
9,710 3.140 ± 0.516

As a result of the t-test analysis, the presence of students from more than one ethnicity in theschool did not affect the teacher-student relationship in France, Italy, and Spain (p>.05);
however, the teacher-student relationship decreased in Turkey if there were more than one
ethnicity in the school (H5.2: partially accepted).
Finally, multiple regression analysis was conducted separately for each country to determine
the impact of cultural diversity practices on the general school climate, and the findings of theregression analysis are presented in Table 10.

65

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Table 10The Effect of Cultural Diversity Practices on General School Climate by Country*
FranceItaly
Spain
Turkey
β
t
p
β
t
p
β
t
p
β
t
p
(Constant)
37.143 0.000
35.065 0.000
86.454 0.000
70.352 0.000
TQ44
0.018 1.028 0.304 0.028 1.523 0.128 -0.008 -0.921 0.357 -0.021 -2.411 0.016
TQ45A
0.010 0.586 0.558 0.029 1.371 0.170
0.025 2.345 0.019
0.007 0.780 0.435
TQ45B
0.029 1.543 0.123 0.064 2.978 0.003
0.036 3.317 0.001
0.026 2.796 0.005
TQ45C
0.087 4.930 0.000 -0.011 -0.652 0.514
0.052 5.504 0.000
0.045 5.185 0.000
TQ45D-0.010 -0.538 0.591 0.056 2.721 0.007
0.012 1.185 0.236
0.001 0.083 0.933
TQ45E
0.047 2.606 0.009 -0.001 -0.070 0.944
0.032 3.110 0.002
0.018 2.031 0.042
TQ46-0.006 -0.354 0.723 0.013 0.757 0.449 -0.010 -1.209 0.227
0.012 1.351 0.177
TQ47A-0.081 -4.899 0.000 -0.121 -6.656 0.000 -0.113 -12.552 0.000 -0.062 -6.450 0.000
TQ47B-0.058 -3.528 0.000 -0.044 -2.460 0.014 -0.063 -7.205 0.000
0.001 0.060 0.952
TQ47C-0.072 -4.566 0.000 -0.101 -5.677 0.000 -0.114 -12.821 0.000 -0.114 -12.543 0.000
TQ47D-0.065 -4.190 0.000 -0.112 -6.331 0.000 -0.148 -16.825 0.000 -0.106 -11.616 0.000
22.37933.000199.668
124.028
F
.000
.000
.000
.000
p
0.050
0.089
0.130
0.066
Adj. R2
1.597
1.881
1.738
1.759
DW
Items

*The increasing codes assigned to TQ44 and TQ47 within the original dataset are indicative of a progressively
unfavourable situation. Consequently, a negative coefficient signifies a contrary positive impact.

According to the results, cultural diversity practices positively influenced the general school
climate in all the countries. The models established for each country were statisticallysignificant (p<0.05). In France, “ensuring that students with and without a migrant backgroundwork together” (β=.087; p<.01), “reducing ethnic stereotyping amongst students” (β=.087;
p<.01), and all diversity practices (TQ47) had a positive impact on the school climate. In Italy,“adapting teaching to the cultural diversity of students” (β=.064; p<.01), “raising awarenessfor cultural differences amongst students” (β=.056, p<.01), and all diversity practices (TQ47)
positively influenced the school climate. In Spain, “ensuring that students with/without amigrant background work together” (β=.025; p<.01), “adapting teaching to the cultural
diversity of students” (β=.036; p<.01), “ensuring that students with/without a migrantbackground work together” (β=.052; p<.01), “reducing ethnic stereotyping amongst students”(β=.064, p<.01), and all diversity practices (TQ47) positively affected the school climate.
Finally, in Turkey, “teaching in a classroom with students from different cultures”, “adapting
teaching to the cultural diversity of students”, “ensuring that students with/without a migrantbackground work together”, and “reducing ethnic stereotyping amongst students” positively
impacted the school climate. Additionally, except from “organizing multicultural events”,
other diversity practices also had a positive impact on the school climate (H6.1: accepted).

66

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

To test H6.2, multiple regression analyses were conducted separately for each country to
examine the impact of cultural diversity practices on teacher-student relations. The findings ofthe regression analysis are presented in Table 11.
Table 11The Effect of Cultural Diversity Practices on Teacher-student Relations by Country*
FranceItaly
Spain
Turkey
β
t
p
β
t
p
β
t
p
β
t
p
42.5350.000
34.6840.000
91.1070.000
78.9730.000(Constant)
0.056 3.088 0.002 0.039 2.065 0.039
0.051 5.958 0.000 -0.033 -3.752 0.000
TQ44-0.010 -0.586 0.558 0.030 1.403 0.161
0.028 2.544 0.011 0.032 3.625 0.000
TQ45A
0.015 0.774 0.439 0.022 0.986 0.324
0.024 2.205 0.027 0.010 1.062 0.288
TQ45B
0.097 5.458 0.000 -0.001 -0.031 0.975
0.093 9.544 0.000 0.044 5.045 0.000
TQ45C-0.009 -0.481 0.631 0.096 4.584 0.000
0.034 3.343 0.001 0.021 2.203 0.028
TQ45D
0.043 2.317 0.021 0.016 0.865 0.387
0.066 6.187 0.000 0.052 5.810 0.000
TQ45E
0.009 0.556 0.578 0.035 2.091 0.037
0.008 0.963 0.336 0.014 1.612 0.107
TQ46-0.029-1.7300.084-0.064-3.4580.001-0.058-6.318 0.000 -0.035 -3.599 0.000
TQ47A-0.047 -2.841 0.005 -0.027 -1.512 0.131 -0.024 -2.664 0.008 0.002 0.161 0.872
TQ47B-0.061 -3.858 0.000 -0.080 -4.427 0.000 -0.080 -8.710 0.000 -0.086 -9.346 0.000
TQ47C-0.047 -3.005 0.003 -0.080 -4.441 0.000 -0.099- 0.000 -0.064 -6.936 0.000
TQ47D
10.95912.30918.152
123.343
78.619
F
b
c
d
.000
.000
.000
.000e
p
0.027
0.050
0.084
0.043
r2
1.736
1.811
1.817
1.855
DW
Items

*The increasing codes assigned to TQ44 and TQ47 within the original dataset are indicative of a progressively
unfavourable situation. Consequently, a negative coefficient signifies a contrary positive impact.

The model established for France was statistically significant (p<.001) accounting for 2.7% of
the variance in teacher-student relations. In France, the results indicated that among theindividual predictor variables, “ensuring that students with/without a migrant background work
together” (β=.087; p<.01) and “reducing ethnic stereotyping amongst students” (β=.047;
p<.01) demonstrated a significant positive relationship with teacher-student relations.
Conversely, “teaching in a classroom with students from different cultures” (β=.018; p>.05),“coping with the challenges of a multicultural classroom” (β=.010; p>.05), “adapting teaching
to the cultural diversity of students” (β=.029; p>.05), and “raising awareness for culturaldifferences amongst students” (β=-0.010; p>.05) did not exhibit significant associations.
Regarding the cultural diversity practices, positive associations were observed for “supporting
activities or organizations that encourage students’ expression of diverse ethnic and cultural
identities” (β=-0.081; p<.01), “organizing multicultural events” (β=-0.058; p<.01), “teaching
students how to deal with ethnic and cultural discrimination” (β=-0.072; p<.01), and “adopting
teaching and learning practices that integrate global issues throughout the curriculum” (β=0.065; p<.01).

67

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

The model employed for Italy was statistically significant (p<.001) accounting for 5.0% of thevariance in teacher-student relations. In Italy, “teaching in a classroom with students fromdifferent cultures” (β=.039; p<.05), “whether the school includes students of more than one
cultural or ethnic background” (β=.035; p<.05), and “raising awareness for cultural differencesamongst students” (β=.096; p<.05) demonstrated a significant positive relationship withteacher-student relations. On the other hand, “coping with challenges of a multiculturalclassroom” (β=.030; p>.05), “adapting teaching to the cultural diversity of students” (β=.022;
p>.05), “ensuring that students with/without a migrant background work together” (β=-.001;
p>.05), and “reducing ethnic stereotyping amongst students” (β=.016; p>.05) did not exhibit
significant associations. Regarding cultural diversity practices, positive associations wereobserved for “supporting activities or organizations that encourage students’ expression ofdiverse ethnic and cultural identities” (β=-.064; p<001), “teaching students how to deal withethnic and cultural discrimination” (β=-.080; p<.001), and “adopting teaching and learning
practices that integrate global issues throughout the curriculum” (β=-.080; p<.001).
The model developed for Spain was statistically significant (p<.001) accounting for 8.4% of
the variance in teacher-student relations. In Spain, only “whether the school includes students
of more than one cultural or ethnic background” did not have a significant impact on teacherstudent relations (β=.008; p>.05). All the other variables, which are “teaching in a classroom
with students from different cultures”, “self-efficacy in multicultural classrooms”(TQ45A,B,C,D,E), and diversity practices (TQ47A,B,C,D) had a positive impact on teacher-student
relations in Spain.
The final model established for Turkey was statistically significant (p<.001) accounting for4.3% of the variance in teacher-student relations. In Turkey, “teaching in a classroom withstudents from different cultures” (β=-.033; p<.05) positively influenced teacher-student
relations. “Coping with the challenges of a multicultural classroom” (β=0.032; p<.001),“ensuring that students with/without a migrant background work together” (β=0.044; p<.001),“raising awareness for cultural differences amongst students” (β=0.021; p<.05), and “reducing
ethnic stereotyping amongst students” (β=0.052; p<.001) also exhibited significant positive
associations. Regarding cultural diversity practices, positive associations were observed for“supporting activities or organizations that encourage students’ expression of diverse ethnic
and cultural identities” (β=-0.035; p<.001), “teaching students how to deal with ethnic andcultural discrimination” (β=-0.086; p<.001), and “adopting teaching and learning practices that
integrate global issues throughout the curriculum” (β=-0.064; p<.001) (H6.2: accepted).
To sum up, based on the research design of this study, the differences in student diversity(RQ1), school climate (RQ2), and diversity in schools in the Mediterranean region (RQ3) were
investigated through the variability of general school climate (H1), teacher-student relations(H2), teaching experience in multicultural classrooms (H3: H3.1, H3.2), teachers’ self-efficacy inmulticultural classrooms (H4), the presence of students from various ethnic backgrounds (H5:H5.1, H5.2), and diversity practices (H6: H6.1, H6.2) in the schools of France, Italy, Spain, andTurkey. The summarized results are presented in Table 12.

68

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Table 12Overall Results of Hypothesis Testing
Hypotheses
H1: The general school climate varies acrosscountries.
H2: Teacher-student relationships vary acrosscountries.
H3: Teaching experience in multicultural classrooms
varies across countries.
H3.1: The general school climate in countries differs
based on teaching experience in multiculturalclassrooms.
H3.2: Teacher-student relationships in countries differ
based on teaching experience in multiculturalclassrooms.
H4: The self-efficacy of teachers teaching
multicultural classrooms varies across countries.
H5: The presence of students from multiple ethnic
backgrounds in the school varies across countries.
H5.1: The general school climate in countries differs
based on the presence of students from multiple
ethnic backgrounds in the school.
H5.2: Teacher-student relationships in countries differ
based on the presence of students from multiple
ethnic backgrounds in the school.
H6: Diversity practices vary across countries.
H6.1: Diversity practices have a positive impact on
the general school climate.
H6.2: Diversity practices have a positive impact onteacher-student relationships.

p-value

Decision

All countries<0.001

Accepted

All countries<0.001

Accepted

All countries <0.01

Accepted

All countries>0.05

Rejected

Turkey>0.05
Other countries<0.01

Rejected for Turkey
Accepted for France,
Italy, and Spain

All countries<0.001

Accepted

All countries<0.01

Accepted

France>0.05
Italy>0.05
Spain<0.01
Turkey<0.01
France>0.05
Italy>0.05
Spain >0.05
Turkey<0.01
All countries<0.01

Rejected forFrance and Italy
Accepted forTurkey and Spain
Accepted only for
TurkeyRejected forother countries
Accepted

All countries<0.01

Accepted

All countries <0.01

Accepted

Discussion
This study sought to determine the degree to which student diversity and school climate differ
within and among France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey by examining and comparing the effects ofstudent diversity on school climate in these selected Mediterranean nations. The results
revealed several significant findings. Firstly, evident variations were detected in the generalschool climate, teacher-student relationships, teaching experience in multicultural classrooms,
self-efficacy of teachers, and the presence of students from multiple ethnic backgrounds among
the countries (H1, H2, H3, H4, and H5). These findings align with prior research in the field(Dawes et al., 2020; Rasheed et al., 2020; Thapa et al., 2013; Voight & Nation, 2016). Spainand Italy had a higher proportion of classrooms with diverse cultural or ethnic student
populations compared to France and Turkey (H3 and H5). Consistently, as stated by PatiñoSantos and Rubinstein (2012), “Spain shows a wide variety of communities”, which cancontribute to a rich and multicultural learning environment in Spanish schools by fosteringinteractions and exchanges among students from different backgrounds. Similarly, due to the69

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

number of immigrant students in Italian schools resulting in more heterogeneous student
populations, it was reported that teachers in Italy were in great need of professional
development for teaching in multicultural settings (Forghani-Arani et al., 2019).
Furthermore, diversity practices differed among the countries, with Spain excelling in culturalexpression and multicultural events, France addressing discrimination, Italy incorporating
global themes, and Turkey showing a relatively lower emphasis on diversity practices (H6).
These findings align with previous research highlighting the importance of diversity practices
in promoting inclusive and tolerant school environments (Akkari & Radhouane, 2022;
Karacabey et al., 2019; Thapa et al., 2013; Voight & Nation, 2016).
Post hoc analyses revealed significant differences in coping with challenges of multiculturalclassrooms, adapting teaching to cultural diversity, raising awareness for cultural differences,and reducing ethnic stereotyping among students across the four countries. France and Spain
were similar in most sub-dimensions, while Italy displayed high self-efficacy in coping withchallenges, and France excelled in ensuring collaboration between students with/without
migration backgrounds (H4). Consistently, Romijn and colleagues (2020) detected that thevariance of Italian teachers’ self-efficacy related to diversity was a little higher compared tothe other countries, which is consistent with the results of this study. Regarding intercultural
education in France, Akkari and Radhouane (2022) highlighted the centralized system inFrance about “strategies dealing with cultural diversity in the school” and the creation of“integration classes” in France for students from different cultures to provide intercultural,
linguistic, and social support.
The general school climate varied among countries, with France and Italy differingsignificantly from the others (H1). As confirmed by Dawes and colleagues (2020) and
Khairutdinova and fellows (2022), a positive school climate is significant for student wellbeing, academic achievement, and social-emotional development. It was also detected thatteacher-student relationships also varied, with Turkey having the lowest mean score and Spain
having the highest (H2). Strong teacher-student relationships have been associated with positive
student outcomes, including engagement, motivation, and academic success (Rasheed et al.,2020; Thapa et al., 2013). In Turkey, despite the paucity of research that specifically examines
the learning environment from the perspective of diversity, a significant tendency was detected
for inclusive education practices (Sarigoz, 2019). While the diversity of students in Turkishschools presents chances for cross-cultural interaction and tolerance, it can also create
problems because of linguistic and cultural barriers. Turkey is working to promote inclusive
practices and cultivate welcoming school environments (Karacabey et al., 2019). According to
Basbay and Bektas (2009), teachers in Turkey need to be aware of students’ values, possess
the knowledge and abilities to integrate cultural differences, and update the classroom
environment, instructional strategies, and learning and teaching methods to meet the needs ofthe students by emphasizing the need for educational opportunities to help students internalize
multiculturalism, particularly in institutions that prepare teachers.

70

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Regarding the relationship between teaching experience in multicultural classrooms andteacher-student relationships, Italy showed a more positive association, while France and Spain
displayed a decline in the relationship with increasing teaching experience (H3.2). According
to these findings, teachers working in multicultural classrooms require continuous professional
development and assistance to successfully navigate the difficulties and build strong
relationships with their students (Forghani-Arani et al., 2019). A decline was explored in theassociation between teacher-student relationships and teaching experience in multiculturalclassrooms in France and Spain, which suggests that the ability of teachers in these nations tobuild effective relationships with students from different backgrounds may have decreased asthey gained more experience. These results underline the necessity of ongoing assistance andinstruction for teachers in France and Spain to give them the knowledge and abilities to develop
lasting relationships with their students throughout their careers as educators.
The presence of students from multiple ethnic backgrounds in the school influenced the generalschool climate differently, and an increasing trend was detected in Spain, but it was decreasingin Turkey (H5.1). Similarly, it was also revealed that the teacher-student relationship was
negatively affected by the presence of multiple ethnicities in Turkey, but not in France, Italy,
and Spain (H5.2). In other words, in Turkey, the interaction between students and teachers was
negatively impacted by the presence of various ethnic groups in the classrooms. This could be
because Turkish teachers’ relationships with students from different cultures may be influenced
negatively as a result of the difficulties teachers may encounter when working with students
from various ethnic backgrounds. In contrast, the presence of multiple ethnicities in the schoolsof France, Italy, and Spain did not significantly impact the relationship between students andteachers, which may result from teachers’ development of the necessary methods and strategies
to successfully manage the diversity of their classrooms and strong interactions with students
from different ethnic backgrounds. These findings revealed the complex dynamics between
student diversity, school climate, and teacher-student relationships, which suggests the needfor inclusive practices and strategies promoting positive interactions and cultural
understanding among students from diverse backgrounds (Hoti et al., 2017; Khairutdinova etal., 2022).
The models established for each country identified specific factors that positively influenced
the school climate and teacher-student relationships (H6.1 and H6.2), which aligns with theexisting literature. A supportive environment at school promotes the growth of positive
relationships between students and teachers and the effective management of behavioural andpsychological issues; therefore, a welcoming learning environment is critical for diverse
student populations (Hoti et al., 2017; Khairutdinova et al., 2022; Thapa et al., 2013).
In conclusion, the findings of the present study demonstrated several notable differences inschool climate, teacher-student interactions, teaching experience, student diversity, anddiversity practices among France, Italy, Spain, and Turkey. These results contribute to theunderstanding of the intricate interactions between student diversity and school climate inMediterranean countries. Hence, it is significant to promote inclusive educational71

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

environments in schools and implement effective diversity practices to foster positive school
climates and enhance teacher-student relationships.
Conclusion
In summary, this study explored the significant variations in school climate, teacher-student
relationships, teaching experience, student diversity, and diversity practices among France,
Italy, Spain, and Turkey. Accordingly, some important practical implications can berecommended to educators, policymakers, and researchers. The results indicate that teachers
need specialized professional development programs to improve their ability to teach inmulticultural environments and to satisfy the requirements of various student populations.
Moreover, the differences in diversity practices among the countries underscored theimportance of implementing inclusive policies and strategies promoting cultural expression,
addressing discrimination, and incorporating global themes in curricula as detected in Spain,
France, and Italy, which can serve as valuable examples for other countries exploring toenhance their diversity practices. Additionally, regarding the variations in school climate andteacher-student relationships, it is a requirement for practitioners and teachers to foster positiveand inclusive learning environments. Therefore, educators and school administrators should
prioritize creating supportive school climates that should promote student well-being,
academic achievement, and social-emotional development for all. Strong teacher-student
relationships should be built and teachers should be provided with the necessary support andprofessional development to navigate the challenges of multicultural classrooms. It is alsoessential for education systems to invest in teacher training programs that equip educators withthe knowledge, skills, and resources including cultural competency training, interculturalcommunication skills development, and strategies for creating inclusive learning environments
to effectively teach in diverse classrooms.
For future investigations, it would be valuable to explore the long-term effects of diversity
practices on student outcomes, and the role of specific interventions and policies in enhancing
school climate and teacher-student relationships. Additionally, examining the perspectives andexperiences of students, parents, and school administrators regarding diversity and theirinfluence on school climate can provide further insights into the dynamics of diverse
educational settings.

72

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

References
Ainley, J., & Carstens, R. (2018). Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018
Conceptual Framework. 187. https://doi.org/10.1787/799337c2-en
Akkari, A., & Radhouane, M. (2022). Intercultural education in France. In Intercultural
approaches to education: From theory to practice (pp. 117–128). Springer
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70825-2_9
Aldridge, J. M., Ala’i, K. G., & Fraser, B. J. (2016). Relationships between school climate
and adolescent students’ self-reports of ethnic and moral identity. Learning
Environments Research, 19(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9199-9
Basbay, A., & Bektas, Y. (2010). Instructional environment and teacher competences in thecontext of multiculturalism. Education and Science, 34(152), 30–43. Retrieved fromhttp://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/6
Caravita, S. C. S., Stefanelli, S., Mazzone, A., Cadel, L., Thornberg, R., & Ambrosini, B.
(2020). When the bullied peer is native-born vs. immigrant: A mixed-method study
with a sample of native-born and immigrant adolescents. Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology, 61(1), 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12565
Cerna, L., Mezzanotte, C., Rutigliano, A., Brussino, O., Santiago, P., Borgonovi, F., &Guthrie, C. (2021). Promoting inclusive education for diverse societies. 260. OECD.
https://doi.org/10.1787/94ab68c6-en
Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (2014). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneousclassroom (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.
Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research,
policy, practice, and teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 180–213.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810911100108
Davis, G., Anroop, D., Ahmadian, A., Dumais, N., & Shamisa, A. (2022). Multiculturalism
in the classroom is the gateway to a richer learning environment. Classroom
Practice in 2022. Retrieved fromhttps://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/educ5202/chapter/multiculturalism-in-theclassroom-is-the-gateway-to-a-richer-learning-environment/
Dawes, M., Farmer, T., Hamm, J., Lee, D., Norwalk, K., Sterrett, B., & Lambert, K. (2020).
Creating supportive contexts for early adolescents during the first year of middle
school: Impact of a developmentally responsive multi-component intervention.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49(7), 1447–1463.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01156-2
Dubbeld, A., de Hoog, N., den Brok, P., & de Laat, M. (2019). Teachers’ multicultural
attitudes and perceptions of school policy and school climate in relation to burnout.
Intercultural Education, 30(6), 599–617.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2018.1538042
Forghani-Arani, N., Cerna, L., & Bannon, M. (2019). The lives of teachers in diverse
classrooms. 198. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/8c26fee5-en
Gromova, C., Khairutdinova, R., Birman, D., & Kalimullin, A. (2021). Educational practices
for immigrant children in elementary schools in Russia. Education Sciences, 11(7).
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070325

73

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Holt, M. K., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Polanin, J. R., Holland, K. M., DeGue, S., Matjasko, J.
L., Wolfe, M., & Reid, G. (2015). Bullying and suicidal ideation and behaviors: A
meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 135(2), e496–e509.
https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-1864
Hoti, A. H., Heinzmann, S., Müller, M., & Buholzer, A. (2017). Psychosocial adaptation andschool success of Italian, Portuguese and Albanian students in Switzerland:
Disentangling migration background, acculturation and the school context. Journalof International Migration and Integration, 18(1), 85–106.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-015-0461-x
Iglesias-Diaz, P., & Romero-Perez, C. (2021). Emotional and inclusive classrooms andadolescent well-being: A systematic review. Educacion XX1, 24(2), 305–350.
https://doi.org/10.5944/educXX1.28705
Kaplan, I., & Bista, M. B. (2022). Welcoming diversity in the learning environment:
Teachers’ handbook for inclusive education. UNESCO. Retrieved fromhttps://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000384009.locale=en
Karacabey, M. F., Ozdere, M. & Bozkus, K. (2019). The attitudes of teachers towards
multicultural education. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 383–393.
https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.1.383
Khairutdinova, R. R., Gromova, C. R., Zheltukhina, M. R., Chistyakov, A. A., &Daitgadzhiev, G. M. (2022). Adaptation of the classroom cultural diversity climate
scale for Russia. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 9(2), 248–265.
https://doi.org/10.29333/ejecs/1191
Konishi, C., Hymel, S., Zumbo, B. D., & Li, Z. (2010). Do school bullying and studentteacher relationships matter for academic achievement? A multilevel
analysis. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 25(1), 19–39.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573509357550
Konold, T., Cornell, D., Shukla, K., & Huang, F. (2017). Racial/ethnic differences inperceptions of school climate and its association with student engagement and peer
aggression. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(6), 1289–1303.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0576-1
Lewno-Dumdie, B. M., Mason, B. A., Hajovsky, D. B., & Villeneuve, E. F. (2020). Studentreport measures of school climate: A dimensional review. School Mental Health,12(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09340-2
Nieto, S., & Bode, P. (2018). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural
education (7th ed.). Pearson.
OECD. (2018a). TALIS 2018 Database. OECD. Retrieved fromhttps://www.oecd.org/education/talis/talis-2018-data.htm
OECD. (2018b). Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS): Teacher
Questionnaire. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/TALIS-2018MS-Teacher-Questionnaire-ENG.pdf.
OECD. (2019). TALIS 2018 and TALIS starting strong 2018 user guide. Retrieved fromhttps://www.oecd.org/education/talis/TALIS_2018TALIS_Starting_Strong_2018_User_Guide.pdf

74

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Patiño-Santos, A., & Rubinstein, C. V. (2012). Dealing with multiculturalism in the Spanishclassroom. In J. A. Spinthourakis, J. Lalor, & W. Berg (Eds.), Cultural diversity inthe classroom: A European comparison (pp. 145–162). VS Verlag für
Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93494-5_9
Pollock, K., & Briscoe, P. (2020). School principals’ understandings of student difference
and diversity and how these understandings influence their work. International
Journal of Educational Management, 34(3), 518–534.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-07-2019-0243
Price, H., & Carstens, R. (2020). Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2018
analysis plan. 220. https://doi.org/10.1787/7b8f4779-en
Rasheed, D. S., Brown, J. L., Doyle, S. L., & Jennings, P. A. (2020). The effect of teacher–childrace/ethnicity matching and classroom diversity on children’s socioemotional and academic
skills. Child Development, 91(3), e597–e618. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13275
Romijn, B. R., Slot, P. L., Leseman, P. P. M., & Pagani, V. (2020). Teachers’ self-efficacy
and intercultural classroom practices in diverse classroom contexts: A cross-national
comparison. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 79, 58–70.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2020.08.001
Sarigoz, O. (2019). Teacher candidates’ opinions on inclusive education practices. Online
Submission, 14(5), 2623–2637. https://doi.org/10.29228/TurkishStudies.32691
Schwarzenthal, M., Schachner, M. K., Juang, L. P., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2020). Reaping
the benefits of cultural diversity: Classroom cultural diversity climate and students’intercultural competence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(2), 323–346.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2617
Shirazi, R. (2018). “I’m supposed to feel like this is my home”: Testing terms of sociopoliticalinclusion in an inner-ring suburban high school. Journal of Educational Administration,
56(5), 519–532. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-01-2018-0009
Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school
climate research. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 357–385.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313483907
The World Bank. (2021). World development indicators: GNI per capita, Atlas method [Datafile]. Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD.
Ulbricht, J., Schachner, M. K., Civitillo, S., & Noack, P. (2022). Teachers’ acculturation in
culturally diverse schools-How is the perceived diversity climate linked tointercultural self-efficacy? Frontiers in Psychology, 13.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.953068
Voight, A., & Nation, M. (2016). Practices for improving secondary school climate: A
systematic review of the research literature. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 58(1–2), 174–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12074
Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. L. (2016). School climate: A review of the construct,measurement, and impact on student outcomes. Educational Psychology Review,
28(2), 315–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9319-1
Corresponding author: F. Sehkar Fayda-Kinik
Email: kinik@itu.edu.tr

75