Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Group concept mapping study reveals hands-on training as the top teacher preparation priority in primary educators, highlighting practical experience over theoretical instruction.
The need to strengthen teacher preparation for inclusive education has become an international priority. Despite the growing body of research on inclusive education, few studies have empirically identified and prioritised teacher preparation needs from the perspective of key stakeholders. This study employed Group Concept Mapping (GCM) to explore the teacher preparation priorities identified by primary school teachers and teacher educators specialising in inclusive education. Through collaborative idea generation, sorting, and rating processes, participants identified and prioritised key areas for teacher preparation. The findings revealed both shared priorities and differences between groups. While primary school teachers tended to associate diversity more closely with learning difficulties and support needs, teacher educators adopted a broader understanding linked to learner variability and participation. Across both groups, practical and experiential preparation emerged as the most highly valued dimension of inclusive teacher education. Participants also emphasised the importance of inclusive pedagogies, Universal Design for Learning, inclusive assessment, collaborative practices, and knowledge of learning difficulties and support needs. Overall, four shared training domains were identified: practical preparation, theoretical preparation, teachers’ professional skills, and personal and interpersonal competences. The findings provide a stakeholder-informed map of teacher preparation priorities that may support the revision of initial teacher education and continuing professional development programmes for inclusive education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
González-Laguillo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: