IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Strategies to Succeed with Inclusion in a Diverse Learning Environment
May Olaug Horverak
Birkenes Learning Centre
Norway9

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Abstract
Even though inclusion is a strong principle in the Norwegian educational system, there arechallenges when it comes to creating inclusive learning environments. This study investigates
the following: a) What challenges are there in the learning environment in primary school froma teacher’s perspective, and b) what strategies do teachers employ to address these challenges
and create an inclusive learning environment? The framework for data collection in this study
has been a project called SAMM: A Systematic approach to work with mastery, participation,and motivation, where a method based on health promotion theory and self-determination
theory has been developed and applied. Ten teachers were interviewed, after applying a fivestep method where the students identify what is important for them, success factors andobstacles, and make plans regarding what to focus on and what to do. The teachers interviewed
applied the five-step method with focus on life mastery, subjects, or the social environment. A
summative, traditional content analysis has been conducted, based on categories identified ina preliminary study, which investigates challenges and solutions in a diverse learning
environment from a student’s perspective. The three main categories in the analysis wererelational challenges, structural challenges, and individual challenges. The study concludes that
it is important to work systematically and over time to create an inclusive learning
environment. In line with different studies that have investigated interventions for children withbehavioural problems in middle school, it is also recommended to facilitate self-regulation andchoice-making to create an inclusive learning environment.
Keywords: diversity, inclusion, participation, self-regulation, primary school, learning
environment

10

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Several formal guidelines within the Norwegian educational system ensure inclusion and theestablishment of a safe learning environment in school (Report to the Storting 6, 2019-2020;
The Education Act, 1998, § 9a). However, despite the good intentions of politicians (Tveitnes,2022), schools may not necessarily implement inclusive practices. Inclusion was previously
narrowly defined as the inclusion of marginalized students with special needs in regular schools(UNESCO, 1994), where all students belonged to the same community. More recent definitions
take a broader perspective, describing inclusion as a process that addresses various needs thatall students have. This includes ensuring student participation, and allowing students to
influence the learning environment and the organization of teaching (Report to the Storting 6,
2019-2020; UNESCO, 2005). Another aspect of inclusion, as emphasized by Haug (2014), a
Norwegian professor in educational research, is that students must benefit from the education,either through social learning or subject-based learning, for education to be considered
inclusive. As a result, to ensure inclusion in schools, teachers must adapt to the students’preferred learning styles rather than expecting students to adapt to their own preferred teachingstyles. This becomes a challenge in regular schools where classes often comprise students withdiverse needs and preferences.
The current study investigates how teachers who have implemented an approach to promotestudent participation have addressed various challenges in the learning environment tofacilitate inclusion. The approach encompasses a five-step method (Horverak, 2023),
developed in a project centered on mastery, participation, and motivation. In this method,
students are guided to 1) identify what is important for them, 2) recognize their strengths andareas of satisfaction and 3) identify potential obstacles hindering them from achieving theirgoals, 4) plan what to focus on, and 5) determine specific actions they will take to effect change.
This method has been applied with focus on life mastery, subjects, and the learning
environment. Using this five-step method as a framework, teachers have identified the
obstacles faced by their students and experimented with various strategies to address thesechallenges. Both challenges and strategies are investigated in the analysis in the current study.
The five-step method is grounded in self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017), which
underscores autonomy, competence, and relatedness as essential needs to foster intrinsic
motivation. Additionally, it draws from health promotion theory (Antonovsky, 2012), whichasserts that to experience a sense of coherence, an individual must comprehend situations, feel
capable of handling them, and perceive their actions as meaningful. When applied to subjects,
the method aligns with self-regulation theory, wherein students are actively engaged in
identifying problems, examining solutions, and planning and evaluating their own learning
process (Boekaerts & Niemivirta, 2005).
The research question in this study is two-fold: a) What challenges are there in the learning
environment in primary school from a teacher’s perspective, and b) what strategies do teachers
employ to address these challenges and create an inclusive learning environment? The study’s
sample is limited to teachers who have participated in the aforementioned project. This
selection was made with the aim of providing the most effective answers to the researchquestions, by having informants who have focused on identifying student obstacles and triedout different strategies as potential solutions. The study’s primary objective is not to generalize

11

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

or to find a representative sample but to discover exemplary strategies that can be applied toaddress challenges when working with creating an inclusive learning environment, which canbe of value to other practitioners.
In the following, the theory of self-determination will be explored in greater detail, as alongwith research conducted in an educational context that is grounded in this theory. Since thisarticle primarily focuses on student diversity, there will also be a summary of research on
students with behavioural difficulties, with elaborations on specific programs that haveprovided support to such students. Subsequently, the research method will be outlined,
including details about the sample, data collection and analytical approach. The results will bepresented, comprising a first section on challenges the teachers have identified, and a second
section on strategies they have applied to address these challenges. In the discussion section,
the findings will be related to theory of inclusion, self-determination theory and the review of
research on programmes designed for children with behavioural problems. In addition, thevalidity of the findings is discussed. Finally, the findings of the study are summarized, andrecommendations for future research will be provided.
Literature Review
In self-determination theory, there is a division between extrinsic motivation, facilitatedthrough reward systems, and intrinsic motivation, facilitated through meeting the needs ofcompetence, autonomy, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). The competence need is closely
related to mastery and having an expectation to master situations, or self-efficacy, as Bandura(1997) describes it. Having autonomy in a learning context means being in control of one’s
own learning process, setting goals, making plans, carrying plans out and adjusting them as
needed (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2018). Relatedness, the third basic need, concerns the need tobelong to a community. Research has shown that intrinsic motivation, characterized by aninterest to learn, is crucial for both academic performance and well-being in school (Deci &Ryan, 2000).
In their review of research on self-determination theory in an educational context, Ryan andDeci (2020) report on several studies that support a positive relation between autonomy-based
motivation in classrooms and academic achievement in various subjects (Grolnick et al., 1991;
Grolnick & Ryan, 1987; Guay et al., 2010; Howard et al., 2017; Katz et al., 2014). They also
refer to studies that have demonstrated correlations between autonomy-supportive teachers andintrinsic motivation, perceived competence, and self-esteem (Deci et al., 1981; Ryan &Grolnick, 1986). Autonomy-support is a central element in several interventions based on selfdetermination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2020). This means that teachers facilitate students to takeownership of their own learning process and provide different possibilities are provided
through choices of tasks and procedures that may engage students. By making choices, students
experience autonomy and intrinsic motivation (Bao & Lam, 2008; Reeve et al., 2003, Patall etal., 2008). Studies have also demonstrated correlations between autonomy-support in
combination with clear structures concerning expectations, goals, and directions on the one
hand, and better use of self-regulation strategies and lower anxiety on the other (Hardré &12

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Reeve, 2003; Vansteenkiste et al., 2012). Autonomy-support and clear structure are also
combined in the five-step method applied in the current study, serving as a framework forteachers and students to identify obstacles and find solutions together (Horverak, 2023).
Learner Diversity and Behavioural Problems
As highlighted by the American child psychologist Greene (2011), many children with social,emotional, and behavioural problems are often misunderstood, and addressing challenging
behaviour incorrectly can perpetuate the issue. Greene challenges the behaviouristic approach
to behavioural problems, which may involve detention and expulsion, and emphasizes thatchildren are not robots that may be programmed and controlled. He asserts that behaviouralproblems arise when expectations to the child are higher than the child’s capacity to respondin an acceptable way. Children are diverse, and when different children are subjected to similar
expectations, it can lead to challenging behaviour, particularly in children who do not haveage-adequately developed mindsets, or different disabilities.
Many students in schools exhibit behavioural problems, such as ADHD (attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder) (Olsen & Mikkelsen, 2015). These issues often result in disruption in
the classroom, which teachers may not feel confident in managing (Overland, 2007). Signs of
ADHD include attention difficulties, hyperactivity, impulsiveness, and concentration
challenges. (Olsen & Mikkelsen, 2015). Children with ADHD are easily distracted and struggle
with self-regulation (Ogden, 2022). Various approaches are used to handle and support students
with behavioural problems to improve their adaption to everyday school life. A recent literature
review focused on middle school students, aged 11 to 15 years, has identified numerous
programmes that have had an effect on this student group (Alperin et al., 2021). These
programmes generally include some type of self-regulation practice, which is aligns with thefive-step approach applied in the present study (Horverak, 2023).
Programmes for Students with Behavioural Problems
Programmes that include giving students with behavioural problems choices in the learning
situation aim at improving working ability and reducing disturbing behaviour in class. Kern etal.’s study (2002) on the programme Choice-making included six students with different
behavioural disorders, that were exposed to an intervention allowing them to make choices
concerning what to work with and how to do this. For example, they could choose whether towork individually on a computer or in collaboration with peers, or they could choose the topic
or materials to be used in class. The teacher planned different options based on the students’interests. Engagement and disruptive behaviour were measured through observation, and theintervention period included phases of a few days, alternating between baseline phases ofteacher-controlled teaching and intervention phases with choices. The results showed anincrease in engagement and a decrease in disruptive behaviour in both intervention phases. In
the baseline periods, there was a decrease in engagement and an increase in disruptive
behaviour. The study generally shows a positive effect of giving students with behaviouralproblems choices, which means more autonomy, in the learning situation.

13

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

The Challenging Horizon Programme is another programme that includes interventions on selfregulation, in addition to practising social skills (Evans et al., 2007). The intervention covers
academic skills such as note-taking and using organizational strategies like monitoring theirown learning activities by taking notes on exercises performed, as well as social skills such asproblem solving, practice of prosocial behaviour, mastering anger, and conversational skills.
The study involved a three-year-long intervention with 42 students in test-groups and 37 incontrol-groups. The results based on evaluations from teachers and parents showed some
improvements in social and academic functioning over time in the intervention group. The
findings were not significant, but some suggested a cumulative increase over time that might
result in long-term effects on attention problems, hyperactivity, and social functioning (Evanset al., 2007).
A programme called A Classwide Peer-assisted Self-management Program (Mitchem et al.,2001) was implemented in three regular seventh-grade classes, with ten students facing
different behavioural challenges and learning difficulties receiving an intervention. The classes
were educated on what self-control means, and they roleplayed class rules. The class rules weredisplayed on the classroom wall, and every student in class was assigned a partner. The resultsof the study showed that the time all the students in the classes concentrated on tasks increased,
including the students with specific challenges. During the intervention period, they werefocused on tasks 80 % of the time, which was an increase from 35 % at the baseline. Overall,there was an improvement in the classes regarding behaviour and social skills, and this positivechange persisted as the programme gradually ended.
Another study with a focus on self-regulation describes an intervention called I Control (Smithet al., 2017). This programme includes knowledge presented by the teacher and an IT-based
mind-training lab. It consists of four units that may influence cognition and emotions,
ultimately strengthening self-regulation. Unit one concerns working memory, and the students
are presented with different tasks to solve. Unit two focuses on setting goals, and the students
learn to set value-based goals and find realistic strategies to reach them. The third unit focuses
on regulation of emotions, and the students learn to identify emotions and find effective
strategies to regulate unwanted emotions. The fourth unit concerns problem-solving, and thestudents are trained in skills they need to solve everyday problems. The study involved 167
students with behavioural problems, from 17 classes, whereof nine classes were intervention
groups and eight were control groups. Based on teachers’ reports, the findings showed apositive effect on the students’ executive functions (Smith et al., 2017), which involve thebrain’s performing functions such as starting on a task, generating ideas and problem-solving
strategies (Olsen & Mikkelsen, 2015). In addition, all the students reported improved emotional
control, meaning they could better moderate inappropriate emotional outbursts (Smith et al.,2017), a result corroborated by the teachers’ reports. Regarding behavioural problems, theresults indicated a tendency that students with the lowest initial scores, meaning the students
who needed the intervention the most, exhibited the most significant positive development inbehaviour.

14

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

A programme called Coping Power Universal (Muratori et al., 2020) that has been applied toreduce emotional and behavioural problems, as well as promoting prosocial behaviour, focusedon developing mastery strategies. The programme includes six main modules, where the firstmodule concerns reaching short-term and long-term goals, the second is about developing
emotional awareness, the third focuses on emotional regulation, the fourth involves taking
different perspectives, the fifth is about problem solving and the sixth includes collaboratingwith peers. The sample in this study included 839 students, whereof 29 of them had some formof intellectual challenge or sensory issues. The findings showed that the programme provided
the students with useful strategies, reduced mental problems, and increased prosocial
behaviour.
The different programmes described all include various strategies related to self-regulation,
problem-solving, goal setting and raising consciousness. These elements are also included in
the five-step approach, which serves as the framework for data collection in the current study
and has been applied as a universal measure in ordinary classes and schools where there is
student diversity. The application of universal self-regulation strategies in classrooms has beenquestioned, as students who benefit most from these types of strategies, often are the students
who perform well academically. Therefore, these universal approaches may inadvertently
widen the gap between students (Madsen, 2020). Nevertheless, the studies described above
demonstrate that also students struggling with self-regulation, or with behavioural problems,
can benefit from interventions that include self-regulation practices and social skills training.
MethodThis study applies a qualitative research design to investigate teachers’ understanding ofchallenges in the learning environment and strategies they employ to address these challenges.
The study may be defined as a multiple-case study (Bryman, 2012, p. 77), as the data material
comprises interviews from 10 informants. The data was collected during the spring of 2021, in
relation to reporting on a project, where a five-step method for mastery, participation andmotivation was implemented. This method will be presented in greater detail before describing
the procedure of data collection, the sample, and the analysis approach.
The Five-Step Method
The five-step method places its emphasis on aiding students in taking control of their own lives
and learning processes by encouraging them to engage in reflection, both as a class andindividually, through five key questions. The first three questions pertain to situational
assessment, involving the identification of values, success factors and obstacles. Students are
asked to reflect on 1) what is important for them to be content in school, 2) what skills do they
already master, and with what are they content, and 3) whether there are any hindrances
obstructing them from attaining their goals and desires (figure 1, previous published in
Horverak & Aanensen, 2019, Horverak, 2020, Horverak & Langeland, 2022)?

15

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Figure 1
The Five-Step Method

The teacher initiates a class discussion on these three questions, and this is followed up byasking the students to write, or draw for the younger ones, answers to the questions. Dependingon grade, the answers are written anonymously, as one of the points here is that the students
write to themselves and not to the teacher. The teacher collects the student notes and compiles
a summary of anonymous reflections for the next session, which is presented to the class. Thenthe teacher asks the students 4) what they want to focus on, meaning what to work withimproving, or what obstacles to deal with, based on the answers to the first three questions.
Following this, the students discuss strategies that could be applied, or 5) what action to take.
Some of the strategies concern what they can do themselves, other strategies require facilitationfrom the teacher. When applying the method to subjects, the teacher asks the students to reflecton 1) what is important in the subject, 2) what they have already mastered and 3) what theyfind challenging. Subsequently, the students make plans on 4) what they intend to focus on and5) how they plan to work on it. The third variant of the method is adjusted to working on thelearning environment, and is implemented through the student councils, meaning that student
representatives apply the method in their classes with a collective focus and receive support
from their teachers and the adult responsible for the student council.
Data Collection
A semi-structured interview guide was utilised, with some pre-defined questions and topics,that were adjusted in the interview process (Bryman, 2012, p. 471). The interview guidecomprised three sections. The first section consisted of questions on the teachers’ backgroundconcerning working experience. The second section contained questions concerning thelearning environment, and challenges and strategies they employed to address the challenges.
The third section included questions concerning the implementation of the five-step method,
how they had applied it, what they focused on specifically and whether there was a change inthe learning environment. Notes were taken during the interviews, and all data collected wasanonymous.

16

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

SamplePurposive sampling was chosen to ensure that the participants had diverse experience relevantto the research question (Bryman, 2012, p. 418). This resulted in 10 informants, whereof two
were responsible for the student councils in their schools and had applied the five-step method
through the student councils with a focus on the learning environment. The teachers had
different backgrounds and worked on different levels in primary school (table 1).
Table 1
SampleSchoolTeacher

School 1
School 1
School 1
School 1
School 2
School 3
School 3
School 3
School 4
School 5

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Years
workingexperience
8
22
3
35
18
30
15
6
23
4

Years in thecurrent
school
7
20
3
23
18
21
15
4
15
4

Grades taught ingeneralGrade taught attime of interview

5.-7. grade
1.-4. grade
1.-4. grade
Student council
Student council
2.-7. grade
3.-7. grade
5.-7. grade
1.-4. grade
1.-10. grade

6. grade
1. grade
3. grade
Student council
Student council
5. grade
3.-4. grade
6.-7. grade
1.-2. grade
5. grade

Analysis
A summative, traditional content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) was applied to identify thechallenges the teachers identified in the learning environment. A preliminary analysis of
student data related to the same project resulted in the three main categories relational
challenges, structural challenges and individual challenges, and these categories provided aframework for analysis in the current study. The codes that emerged during the analysis werecategorised according to these main categories. The codes closely represented the content,
resulting in a substantial number of codes. Therefore, these codes were further organized into
subcategories within each main category. The number of occurrences of different challenges isreported to give an indication of how many informants mention the different challenges. The
strategies employed by the teachers to address these challenges were analysed using a content
analysis, without counting occurrences, as the purpose here was to show different strategies
that may be applied to establish an inclusive learning environment.
Findings
The first findings present the challenges the teachers experienced in the learning environment.
There are 20 occurrences of relational challenges, 13 occurrences of structural challenges and39 occurrences of individual challenges (Table 2).

17

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Table 2
Challenges in the Learning Environment from a Teacher’s Perspective (n = 10)
Main category
Relational
challenges

Subcategory
Exclusion

Code
Bullying
Keeping out
Rude comments
Disagreement
Dispute over friendships
Drama
Throwing things
Competition
Insecurity
Unfairness
Total
Noise
Not raising hand
Mess
Digitalization
Total
Challenge in the subject
Dyslexia
Challenge to self-regulate
Lack of mastery
Lack of concentration
Difficulties finding words
Pressure from expectations
Lack of motivation
Passivity
Impatience
Restless boys
Inappropriate behaviour
Behavioural difficulties
Emotional difficulties
Grief
Lack of sleep
The invisible children
School anxiety
Low self-esteem
Total

Conflict
Aggressive behaviour
Performance pressure
Relations with adults
Structural
challenges

Rule breaking
Learning tools

Individual
challenges

Learning difficulties

Socio-emotional challenges

Occurrences
2
4
5
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
20
8
1
1
3
13
7
1
3
2
1
1
2
3
1
3
1
2
3
2
1
2
1
1
1
39

The relational challenges are exclusion, conflicts, aggressive behaviour, performance pressure
and relations with adults. Exclusion includes instances of bullying (2), keeping others out (4)and rude comments (5), and conflicts include disagreement (2), dispute over friendships (1)and drama (1). These categories concern students’ interaction with one another. One informant
said “Mobiles and social media is one of the bigger problems now. Little things, keeping out,
when it is a small place and only one group, one feels left outside”. Another informant
mentioned the rude language: “There are probably quite a few that feel they are being teasedby the older students, and the do not like the rude language”. Aggressive behaviour involves
the throwing of objects (2), such as chairs and stones. One informant also mentioned that the18

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

students feel insecure in relation to people they do not now, and another mentioned that thestudents feel that it is unfair when they are treated differently.
The structural challenges involve breaking rules and challenges with learning tools. Breaking
rules includes noise (8), students who speak without raising hands (1) and mess in theclassroom (1). One informant reflected on the fact that the degree of noise varied dependingon the teacher: “I think it is challenging when others have the class, and not me, especially forthe more dutiful students. They struggle when it is noisy”. The challenge with learning tools
concern digitalisation (3), that there has been a fast increase in use and availability of digital
tools, and that it is difficult to find a balance.
The individual challenges comprise different learning difficulties and socio-emotional
challenges. Regarding different learning difficulties, the informants mentioned generalchallenges in subjects (7), such as writing and mathematics, dyslexia (1), difficulties with selfregulation (3), lack of mastery (2), lack of concentration (1) and difficulties with finding theright words (1). Lack of mastery is also related to noise in classes by one informant: “when thestudents do not master, this results in more noise”. Socio-emotional challenges include pressure
from expectations (2), as commented by an informant: “Some feel there is so much they are
expected to deal with, this is something of the most challenging […] the requirements are felt
as too much compared with what they can manage”. Lack of motivation (3) is anotherchallenge, as one of the informants said: “The student surveys show that the students can be
more active, or we want them to be more motivated and that they take more responsibility for
their own learning”. The informants also mentioned passivity (1) and impatience (3), which isrelated to difficulties with working for longer periods with exercises. Other informants
mentioned restless boys (1) and inappropriate behaviour (2), such as destroying things outside
or making some serious and strange comments. In addition, specific behavioural difficulties,
and diagnoses (3) are mentioned. Emotional challenges (2) mentioned are that some students
are tough on the outside, but vulnerable on the inside, as one informant describes: “to talk about
feelings is very difficult, and he is rather closed and concerned with showing a tough outside,at the same time as he is fragile and easily become upset”. In addition, grief (2) is mentioned,lack of sleep (2), the “invisible” children (2), who are quiet and easily forgotten, school anxiety(1) and low self-esteem (1).
The Teachers’ Strategies to Meet the Challenges
The strategies described by the teachers are sorted into the main categories: creating structure,providing acknowledgement, raising consciousness , facilitating activities, ensuring student
participation and applying strategies concerning the adult role (figure 2). More of the strategies
are applied to deal with different challenges.

19

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Figure 2
The Teachers’ Strategies

Concerning structural challenges associated with rule breaking, the teachers created structureby setting boundaries and routines for the students, as well as applying reward systems.
Examples of rewards were that the students could eat cake, watch a movie of their own choice,or do other activities they enjoyed. In terms of structure and routines, the informants mentioned
for example that they made plans for the sessions, had the students stand in a line in themorning, and started with silent reading and a clear “good morning”.
Another strategy the teachers applied was giving acknowledgement to the students. One
informant described it as: “Many conversations, little ‘I see you’, stay in touch and follow up”.
To address the challenge of low self-esteem, a strategy was to focus on the positive and what
they do well. Another informant said that she made a visual tree in the classroom where they
put notes on describing positive occurrences, to reinforce positive behaviour in class – “Ifanyone has heard or experienced something nice, they receive a leaf and put it on the tree”.
This strategy was applied in relation to question two in the SAMM-method, to identify successfactors.
Several of the informants mentioned consciousness-raising as a strategy and said that theytalked with the students to handle different challenges. For example, they talked about
behaviour and what is important for everyone to be okay, as well as addressing grief and how
to comfort each other. Conversations with consciousness-raising were often included when
applying the five-step method systematically and over time. When asked about whether thesystematic work with conversations influenced the class environment, one of the informants

20

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

said: “Yes, it is affected positively […] it is more open, so the students dare to speak aboutproblems and thoughts that we can work with as a group, not just as individuals. It strengthens
the sense of community”. For the students to remember to include each other, which several
students chose as a focus area when working with the five-step method, some teachers put
posters in the classroom. There was also a campaign to keep the school tidy.
Facilitating activities was mentioned by several teachers, more specifically playing different
games, or having outdoor activities. For example, one teacher with a noisy class, and a coupleof students with behavioural problems, moved the class outside and incorporated activities andgames that included running around in the school yard in combination with learning concepts
and fact, or they were asked to do an activity, such as laughing for 30 seconds or give someone
a compliment, between tasks they solved.
Another strategy mentioned is student participation, for example engaging student
representatives in the student council to work with finding strategies for addressing challenges
in the learning environment. In two of the schools, girls’ groups were established, where they
applied the five-step method to make the girls become more conscious about including eachother. This was combined with activities such as making food and playing games. In addition,
the informants mentioned offering choices, both in terms of learning styles and exercises. One
informant said that the students were allowed to choose working position, either sitting or lying,or working outside the classroom. Choosing learning tool, such as computer or paper, is anotheroption mentioned by others. Another informant said that the students were to choose what towork with based on what they had written as focus area in their notebooks used with the fivestep method. The students were then given different exercises to choose from based on what
they had written that they wanted to work with. As one teacher noted: “It is important that thework they have done is made visible, it takes time, so when they have done this job, they
deserve to get SAMM-practice on the schedule, and that I have prepared for this”. Anotherinformant pointed out that having different options makes the students motivated.
The final strategy mentioned by the informants concerns the adults’ role. They emphasize theimportance of being clear and authoritative adults. In addition, they mention collaboration withcolleagues, including teachers and the school nurse, and working together with parents toaddress different challenges. The teacher who mentioned school anxiety as a problem said that
this was solved by talking to the parents. They made an agreement that the girl was going towalk to school with a friend, and that the teacher would meet them outside to greet them in themorning. This approach effectively resolved the situation.
Discussion
This study investigates what challenges the teachers in primary school experience in thelearning environment, and what strategies they employ to address these challenges and create
an inclusive learning environment. The findings of the study show that there are different
relational, structural and individual challenges, and that the teachers worked systematically andconsistently to raise consciousness and find solutions to foster an inclusive learning

21

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

environment. The importance of systematic, long-term efforts is also highlighted in the studies
described from the meta-analysis of interventions related to behavioural problems (Alperin etal., 2021; Evans et al., 2007; Kern et al., 2002; Muratori et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2017).
In this study, the five-step method served as the framework for systematic work with thelearning environment. This approach offers professional autonomy for teachers to adapt
different strategies to the specific context in collaboration with the student group. The list of
strategies employed by the teachers demonstrates the diverse approaches applied, and strategies
are adjusted to the different students’ needs. Student participation is also emphasised, which isa fundamental element in creating an inclusive learning environment (Haug, 2014; Report to
the Storting 6, 2019-2020).
Self-Regulation and Choice-Making
Approaches that promote self-regulation and choice-making for students with behaviouralproblems, as described in the five-step method (Horverak, 2023) and other programmes
presented in the meta-analysis mentioned above (Alperin et al., 2021), may contrast withbehaviouristic approaches involving rewards and punishment (Vogt, 2016), which are often
found in educational contexts. Reward systems are based on the premise that behaviour can be
influenced through extrinsic means (Vogt, 2016). This aligns with a deterministic view,suggesting that humans may be modified by their environment (Johannessen et al., 2010).
Related to self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2017), reward systems may lead to
extrinsic motivation, where students conform to the teacher’s expectations to earn a reward,
rather than because they genuinely want to. In this case, the reward itself motivates, not thedesired behavioural change. This is not a very robust type of motivation, as the change may
fade when the reward is removed. In contrast, by granting students choices, they are given
autonomy-support, which is associated with intrinsic motivation (Bao & Lam, 2008; Reeve etal., 2003, Patall et al., 2008), good results in subjects (Grolnick et al., 1991; Grolnick & Ryan,
1987; Guay et al., 2010; Howard et al., 2017; Katz et al., 2014) and positive self-esteem (Deciet al., 1981; Ryan & Grolnick, 1986).
Often, choices are given students as a reward, as described by the informants, and this is not
an approach that promotes self-regulation, but rather the opposite. Providing choices as areward essentially deprives students of their autonomy, as the choices are conditioned by acertain behaviour. This is a control strategy employed by the teacher. This is turned around in
the choice-making study referred to above (Kern et al., 2002), which shows that students withbehavioural problems improved their concentration during intervention periods when offeredchoices. In the application of the SAMM-method, as described by the informants, the students
are also given choices in the learning process, based on what they have written that they want
to focus on. Students are given choices concerning what to work on, and how to do it, rather
than being manipulated through rewards for following the teacher’s instructions. Providing
choices in the learning process also promotes student participation, a key element in the
renewed curriculum for the Norwegian schools (Ministry of Education and Research, 2017).

22

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

The Authoritative Teacher
Other strategies emphasized by the teachers include establishing clear structures and being
authoritative adults, at the same time as giving acknowledgement to the individual students.
This aligns with the ideal described in theories on the authoritative teacher (Roland, 2021),
which underscore the importance of combining clarity in enforcing rules and regulations withbuilding relations. Research conducted in a Norwegian context based on this theory has shownthat achieving this balance may be challenging. A study revealed that students who reported
increase in teacher surveillance also reported decrease in emotional support (Ertesvåg, 2009).
Finding the right balance between maintaining structure and adhering to regulations on the one
hand and acknowledging and adjusting to each individual’s needs and building relations on theother hand will probably always be a challenge when working with creating an inclusive
learning environment in a classroom with student diversity.
Validity
There are different challenges concerning the validity of this study, as it involves a limited
sample selected through purposive sampling related to a project. The findings reported in thisstudy may not be generalizable to other contexts. In addition, the analysis could have been
carried out differently, and there might be overlaps between the different factors. For example,
noise often results from individual challenges, still, this is coded under the category of
structural challenges. Despite these considerations, the study can still provide valuable insights
for relevant stakeholders, such as teachers, school leaders and politicians, concerning how todeal with challenges in school and establish an inclusive learning environment. The study’s
objective is not to find absolute truths, but rather, as is often the case with educational research,
to focus on utility (Bachman, 2009).
Conclusion
Implementing a method in the classroom, such as the five-step method described here
(Horverak, 2023), enables teachers and students to identify and address challenges incollaboration. The main challenges the teachers identified in the learning environment wererelational challenges such as exclusion, conflict, aggressive behaviour, performance pressure
and relations with adults, structural challenges such as rule-breaking and issues with learning
tools and individual challenges, sorted into the subcategories learning difficulties and socioemotional challenges. To handle these challenges, teachers applied strategies as creating
structure, giving acknowledgement, raising consciousness, facilitating for activities, making
students participate in decision-making and being conscious about the adults’ role asauthoritative, as well as collaborating with colleagues and parents. These strategies may allcontribute to an inclusive learning environment, which means that the students are engaged
and participate in decision-making, they are part of a community, and they profit socially andin subjects (Haug, 2014). There is a need for further research on the potential of this type of
methodology, which aims at being sensitive and respectful of student diversity throughemphasizing student participation, and where teachers collaborate with students in diverse

23

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

classrooms to find solutions to different challenges that occur and assess how these strategies
work for the individual students.

Acknowledgements
This project has been financed by the Norwegian Directorate of Health, the Agder County
through the programme Health-promoting Kindergartens and Schools and the Agder County
Governor.

24

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

References
Alperin, A., Reddy, L. A., Glover, T. A., Bronstein, B., Wiggs, N. B. & Dudek, C. M. (2021).
School-based interventions for middle school students with disruptive behaviors: A
systematic review of components and methodology. School Psychology Review, 1–26.
https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2021.1883996
Antonovsky, A. (2012). Helsens mysterium: Den salutogene modellen [The mystery of thehealth: The salutogenic model]. Gyldendal Norsk Forlag AS.
Bachman, L. F. (2009). Generalizability and research use arguments. In K. Ercikan & W.-M.
Roth (Ed.), Generalizing from educational research: beyond qualitative andquantitative polarization (pp. 127–148). Routledge.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
Bao, X.-H. & Lam, S.-F. (2008). Who makes the choice?: Rethinking the role of autonomy
and relatedness in Chinese children’s motivation. Child Development, 79(2), 269–
283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01125.x
Boekaerts, M. & Niemivirta, M. (2005). Self-regulated learning: Finding a balance between
learning goals and ego-protective goals. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner(Ed.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 417–450). Elsevier Science.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50042-1
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th Ed.). Oxford.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs andthe self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A. J., Sheinman, L. & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess
adults’ orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on
intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology,73(5), 642–650. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.73.5.642
Ertesvåg, S. K. (2009). Classroom leadership: The effect of a school development
programme. Educational Psychology, 29(5), 515–539.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410903122194
Evans, S. W., Serpell, Z. N., Schultz, B. K. & Pastor, D. A. (2007). Cumulative benefits ofsecondary school-based treatment of students with attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder. School Psychology Review, 36(2), 256–273.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2007.12087943
Greene, R. W. (2011). Utenfor: Elever med adferdsutfordringer [Lost at school: Students
with behavioural challenges]. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Grolnick, W. S., Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (1991). Inner resources for school achievement:
Motivational mediators of children's perceptions of their parents. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 83(4), 508–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.83.4.508
Grolnick, W. S. & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children’s learning: An experimental
and individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
52(5), 890–898. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.5.890

25

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Guay, F., Ratelle, C. F., Roy, A. & Litalien, D. (2010). Academic self-concept, autonomous
academic motivation, and academic achievement: Mediating and additive effects.
Learning and Individual Differences, 20(6), 644–653.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.08.001
Hardré, P. L. & Reeve, J. (2003). A motivational model of rural students’ intentions to persist
in, versus drop out of high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 347–
356. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.347
Horverak, M. O. & Aanensen, M. (2019). Decreased motivation and increased mental illness
among young people—a need for teaching life mastery skills in school. The 7th
European Conference on Education, Independence & Interdependence, official
conference proceedings, (pp. 239–251). Retrieve fromhttps://papers.iafor.org/submission52464/
Horverak, M. O. (2020). Developing resilience and life mastery skills in the classroom—amultiple case study comparing a Norwegian and Peruvian context ISSN: 2189-1036.
The 5th IAFOR International Conference on Education–Hawaii 2020 Official
Conference Proceedings (s. 31–44). https://doi.org/10.22492/issn.2189-1036.2020.3
Horverak, M. O. & Langeland, G. M. (2022). SAMM – A systematic approach to mastering
life—the five-step motivation method. The European Conference on Education 2022:
Official Conference Proceedings (pp. 21–31). Retrieved fromhttps://doi.org/10.22492/issn.2188-1162.2022.3
Horverak, M. O., Selås, E. F. & Langeland, G. M. (2023). Inkluderende læringsmiljø –mestring, medvirkning og motivasjon i barneskolen [Inclusive learning environment –mastery, participation and motivation in primary school]. Cappelen Damm
Akademisk.
Howard, J. L., Gagné, M. & Bureau, J. S. (2017). Testing a continuum structure of selfdetermined motivation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 143(12), 1346–1377.
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000125
Hsieh, H.- F. & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.
Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Johannessen, E., Kokkersvold, E. & Vedeler, L. (2010). Rådgivning: Tradisjoner, teoretiske
perspektiver og praksis [Counselling: Traditions, theoretical perspectives andpractice] (3rd Ed.). Gyldendal Akademisk.
Katz, I., Eilot, K. & Nevo, N. (2014). “I’ll do it later”: Type of motivation, self-efficacy andhomework procrastination. Motivation and Emotion, 38(1), 111–119.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-013-9366-1
Kern, L., Bambara, L. & Fogt, J. (2002). Class-wide curricular modification to improve thebehavior of students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders,
27(4), 317–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290202700408
Madsen, O. J. (2020). Livsmestring på timeplanen: Rett medisin for elevene? [Life masteryon the schedule: Right medicine for the students?] Spartacus Forlag.
Mitchem, K. J., Young, K. R., West, R. P., & Benyo, J. (2001). CWPASM: A Classwide
Peer-assisted Self-management Program for General Education Classrooms.
Education and Treatment of Children, 24(2), 111–140.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/42899650

26

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

Ministry of Education and Research. (2017). The renewal of the Knowledge Promotion;
General part – values and principles for education. Retrieved fromhttps://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/?lang=nob
Muratori, P., Bertacchi, I., Catone, G., Mannucci, F., Nocentini, A., Pisano, S., & Lochman,
J. E. (2020). Coping Power Universal for middle school students: The first efficacy
study. Journal of Adolescence, 79, 49–58.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.12.014
Ogden, T. (2022). Sosial kompetanse og problematferd blant barn og unge [Social
competence and problem behaviour among children and youth] (2nd Ed.). Gyldendal.
Olsen, M. H. & Mikkelsen, R. (2015). Sammen for elevers psykososiale miljø [Together for
students’ psychosocial learning environment]. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Overland, T. (2007). Skolen og de utfordrende elevene [School and the challenging
students]. Fagbokforlaget.
Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). The effects of choice on intrinsic
motivation and related outcomes: A meta-analysis of research findings. Psychological
Bulletin, 134(2), 270–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.270
Report to the Storting 6 (2019–2020). Tett på – tidlig innsats og inkluderende fellesskap ibarnehage, skole og SFO. (Staying close – early efforts and inclusive communities inkindergarten, school, and spare time arrangements]. Ministry of Education andResearch. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-620192020/id2677025/
Reeve, J., Nix, G. & Hamm, D. (2003). Testing models of the experience of selfdetermination in intrinsic motivation and the conundrum of choice. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 95(2), 375–392. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.375
Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs inmotivation, development, and wellness. The Guilford Press.
https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28806
Roland, P. (2021). Den autoritative voksenrollen i barnehage og skole [The authoritative
adult role in kindergartens and schools]. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a selfdetermination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
Ryan, R. M. & Grolnick, W. S. (1986). Origins and pawns in the classroom: Self-report andprojective assessments of children's perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 50(3), 550–558. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.550
Skaalvik, E. M. & Skaalvik, S. (2018). Skolen som læringsarena: Selvoppfatning, motivasjonog læring [The school as a learning arena: Self-perception, motivation and learning](3rd ed.). Universitetsforlaget.
Smith, S. W., Daunic, A. P., Algina, J., Pitts, D. L., Merrill, K. L., Cumming, M. M., &Allen, C. (2017). Self-regulation for students with emotional and behavioral
disorders: Preliminary effects of the I Control curriculum. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders, 25(3), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063426616661702

27

IAFOR Journal of Education: Studies in Education

Volume 11 – Issue 3 – 2023

The Education Act. (1998). Act relating to Primary and Secondary Education and Training.
LOV-1998-07-17-61. Ministry of Education and Research. Retrieve fromhttps://lovdata.no/dokument/NLE/lov/1998-07-17-61
Tveitnes, M. S. (2022). Inkludering i en mangfoldig skole – fra teori til praksis [Inclusion in adiverse school – from theory to practice]. In G. Skeie, H. Fandrem og S. E. Ohna(Ed.), Hvordan arbeide med elevmangfold? [How to work with student diversity] (pp.
24–49). Fagbokforlaget. https://doi.org/10.55669/oa100302
UNESCO (1994). The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs
education. United Nations. Ministry of Education and Science, Spain. Retrieved fromhttps://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resourceattachments/Salamanca_Statement_1994.pdf
UNESCO (2005). Guidelines for inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all. Retrieved
from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000140224
Vansteenkiste, M., Sierens, E., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., Dochy, F., Mouratidis, A.,
Aelterman, N., Haerens, L. & Beyers, W. (2012). Identifying configurations ofperceived teacher autonomy support and structure: Associations with self-regulated
learning, motivation and problem behavior. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 431–
439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.002
Vogt, A. (2016). Rådgivning i skole og barnehage: Mange muligheter for hjelp til barn og
unge [Counselling in school and kindergarten: Many possibilities to help children
and youth]. Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
Corresponding author: May Olaug Horverak
Email: may.olaug.horverak@birkenes.kommune.no28