Sustainable Educational Infrastructure: Professional Learning Communities as Catalysts for Lasting Inclusive Practices and Human Well-Being

Abstract

This qualitative research examines how sustainable educational transformation emerges through teachers’ participation in enduring professional learning communities, with a specific focus on inclusive education practices. By investigating the intersection of educational sustainability and professional development, this study analyzed ten teacher communities comprising 156 educators who met regularly throughout the school year. The research revealed how sustainable professional networks create lasting institutional change through four critical stages of teacher transformation: initial resistance to inclusion, recognition of pedagogical misconceptions, development of non-judgmental professional discourse, and establishment of sustainable, inclusive practices. The communities functioned as a sustainable infrastructure that fostered both the environmental and social dimensions of educational development, enabling teachers to build lasting professional confidence and emotional resilience through integrated theoretical learning and practical application. This sustainable approach to professional development helped educators overcome initial resistance to individualized solutions and empowered them to adopt more responsive, inclusive classroom strategies. By creating supportive knowledge-sharing networks that extend beyond initial implementation, these professional communities demonstrated their capacity to generate lasting educational change. The findings illuminate how systematic, collaborative professional development can create sustainable educational frameworks that enhance both teacher growth and inclusive pedagogical approaches, contributing to the broader goals of sustainable educational development. This research offers insights into building sustainable professional learning environments that support long-term institutional change while advancing inclusive education practices.

1. Introduction

Despite advancements in inclusive education over recent decades, education systems worldwide still grapple with complex challenges as they attempt to implement inclusive principles effectively. These are principles based on a social model and philosophical views that emphasize a child’s right to be part of his or her natural environment [1,2]. To this end, the goal of inclusive education is to make adjustments to the regular classroom to address children’s special needs within the regular educational framework.

Key challenges in implementing the inclusive approach include disparities between theoretical policy frameworks and practical implementation [3,4], insufficient allocation of appropriate resources [5], increasingly burdensome workloads for teachers [6], and inadequate professional preparation for addressing the diverse needs present in heterogeneous classrooms [7,8]. This approach is essential in an educational system integrating students with various needs within a shared space; not only does it promote educational equity, but it also contributes to the well-being of both students and teachers as part of sustainable educational development. Empirical studies indicate that numerous educators experience a lack of self-efficacy in their capacity to provide suitable support for all students in inclusive settings, particularly when required to integrate learners with complex needs while simultaneously meeting performance standards and systemic pressures [9,10].

Furthermore, traditional societal and professional conceptualizations concerning “normality” and “difference” continue to influence the way educators perceive and respond to students with diverse needs [11,12]. Establishing a genuinely inclusive educational environment that views diversity as an asset rather than an obstacle [13,14] constitutes a substantial challenge, as it requires confronting these deeply embedded perspectives. Sustained professional development in the field of inclusive education is imperative for the successful implementation of inclusion processes [15,16]. In contrast to traditional models of teacher training that concentrate on the transmission of theoretical knowledge, empirical evidence demonstrates that a more holistic approach is required—one that encompasses emotional, reflective, and practical development dimensions [17,18]. Educators require secure professional environments wherein they can critically examine their perspectives, share pedagogical challenges, receive emotional support, and collaboratively develop innovative practices tailored to the complex realities of inclusive classroom settings [19,20].

In the contemporary educational landscape, characterized by accelerated rates of change and increasingly diverse student needs, single-occasion professional development models prove inadequate [21,22]. What is needed is a supportive and continuous professional infrastructure that accompanies teachers throughout their career trajectories, facilitating their engagement with current knowledge and evidence-based practices and providing adaptive responses to evolving educational challenges [23,24].

Teacher-led professional communities represent a sustainable model for systemic change, as they create an infrastructure that emerges from within the educational field rather than being imposed externally. This bottom-up approach ensures that professional development remains connected to authentic classroom needs while building lasting capacity for continuous teacher growth. Studies have shown that effective teacher development occurs when the teachers are actively involved, question themselves, share their teaching experiences, difficulties, and challenges, and, together, formulate new ways of teaching and treatment [25,26]. The sustainability of teaching communities is enhanced when they are led by educators themselves, as this creates an organic infrastructure that is deeply embedded in the educational field [27,28]. Such communities foster long-term professional development through peer learning and mentoring, establishing self-sustaining networks of expertise that can adapt and grow over time [29,30]. Contemporary approaches to teacher professional development remain largely focused on curricular content, overlooking the critical role of socially mediated learning through collaborative discourse and its transformation into shared tailored professional conceptualizations. These approaches also neglect to include the essential social construction of knowledge through collaborative discourse and the subsequent co-creation of professional conceptual frameworks. Teachers need discourse frameworks to process difficult experiences and emotions. This makes it easier for them to analyze complex experiences honestly and matter-of-factly. Such discourse can deepen their understanding of the teaching staff’s problems and needs [31], and this understanding, in turn, can lead to a fundamental change in how the staff thinks, feels, and acts [32]. Thus, it is essential to identify the process and stages through which teachers can be persuaded to speak freely and examine their activity and responses to various incidents, thus creating a platform where they are comfortable enough to share their struggles and difficulties courageously. The goal is to help them feel at ease and safe, to expose existing knowledge, and to jointly develop new knowledge in the spirit of the inclusive approach.

This work directly corresponds with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goal 4, which focuses on quality education (SDG 4: Quality Education). This goal emphasizes the importance of ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all populations [33]. Specifically, target 4.5 calls for “eliminating gender disparities in education and ensuring equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations” [34].

Professional learning communities of teachers engaged in developing inclusive approaches constitute a central tool for achieving these goals. Research indicates that inclusive education is not only a basic right but also a vital means for breaking cycles of poverty and exclusion, promoting inclusive economic growth, and building more equitable societies [35,36]. In this context, the professional development of teachers focused on inclusion represents a sustainable investment that yields long-term social and economic returns [37].

Beyond Goal 4, investment in inclusive education impacts several additional SDGs: Goal 1 (no poverty), as inclusive education, helps break the intergenerational cycle of poverty; Goal 8 (decent work and economic growth), as inclusive education, enables lifelong learning and increases employability; Goal 10 (reduced inequalities), through providing equal opportunities for all learners; and Goal 17 (partnerships for the goals), as teacher learning communities represent a model of collaboration and partnership [33].

The focus of the current study is on social sustainability in particular, examining how teacher learning communities can provide a supportive infrastructure for achieving long-term systemic change that promotes inclusive approaches. This focus aligns with the contemporary understanding of sustainable development, which recognizes that high-quality inclusive education is both a goal and an essential means for achieving all other SDGs [38,39].

1.1. Inclusion in Education

Inclusion in education represents a way of treating others and recognizing what is to be gained by accepting differences among people [40]. The inclusion process aims to create educational environments that foster emotional and psychological resilience while promoting support for students with diverse needs [41]. Inclusion at school means adapting the framework to the needs of the students [42,43]. The goal of inclusive education, therefore, is to increase and deepen the accessibility, presence, and participation of all students in the learning process [41] by ensuring that all learners with special needs receive equitable and coordinated treatment from the expert teams at the school [44,45].

Although there have been many efforts to foster social equity in education, typically, these have failed on several fronts: they did not introduce substantial changes to the existing structures of segregation and tracking, teachers were not provided with the emotional support needed to carry out the change, and no effort was made to avoid the separation or outright rejection of certain student populations, or compromising academic requirements [31]. For inclusion efforts to succeed, the principal and teaching staff must discuss and precisely define the school’s inclusion policy and work together to translate it into effective practices. This can help cultivate a midlevel leadership imbued with a sense of responsibility for the school’s decisions, which may then be extended to include additional teaching staff members.

The school principal must be aware of the mechanisms that create exclusion and inequality and help teachers learn how to avoid them—for example, by establishing a connection and dialogue with their students, by understanding the student’s background, by changing the way they view or interpret events, and by showing empathy toward their students [32]. The following four modes of action can help teachers alter their working methods [31]: (1) Ensuring that the system prioritizes student retention and shuns the notion of abandoning all hope for a learner. To this end, the principal is responsible for providing a framework that sets clear boundaries for teachers and pupils, includes personal guidance, and maintains unconditionally high learning standards. (2) Encouraging open discourse concerning the emotional experience. This requires the development of a language, borrowed in part from the world of therapy, which focuses on the emotional aspects of the relationships among teachers and students while identifying and addressing negative emotions. (3) “Reframing”, i.e., observing and interpreting reality differently. The complex and demanding nature of the work with at-risk children and youth can lead to a distorted view of their behaviors; reframing allows for a different conceptualization of these behaviors, namely, as signs of the pain or distress they experience rather than as discipline-related problems that require a punitive response. (4) Illustrating and practicing alternative professional behavior; for example, using simulation tools allows teachers to safely experiment with and practice alternative communication approaches with students and parents.

It is the principal’s responsibility to cultivate an educational environment that takes an interest in teachers, parents, and students as human beings and provides students with a well-defined, caring environment adapted to their needs [46,47]. Teachers need to work within a supportive community and an empowering environment that can help them cope with the challenges of teaching, develop their professional identity, and adopt inclusive practices [48].

With the environment and preparations described herein and when the right to equality is expressed in the programs of study and the school’s social behavior, teachers can act as gatekeepers in all matters related to exclusion. With such conditions, teachers should be able to identify and assist those who are unsuccessful in participating academically or socially and those who are the target of bullying. Thus, the teacher’s role is to address the negative labeling of students and help alter such behaviors to mitigate feelings of exclusion and rejection. In parallel, teachers need to enable students to feel in control of their social situation and be free to choose their group affiliation [49,50,51].

1.2. Teacher Communities as a Space for Learning and Development

Teacher communities have become the focus of attention of policymakers and researchers in education [24] because they represent a model of professional development that can strongly influence the teacher, classroom instruction, and students’ achievements [52]. The initiative for new training models to help cultivate professional identity and appropriate practices, including the model of learning communities for teachers, arose partly in response to claims that the conventional means of professional development were ineffective [53]. Education policymakers understood that to improve teachers’ practices and pedagogical skills, teachers needed opportunities to address their professional development. A learning community for teachers is defined by some researchers as a group of teachers who are mutually dependent, engage in discourse with each other, make decisions, and share and build knowledge based on a sense of group identity and common goals and interests [54]. These researchers emphasized that establishing a group identity entails mutual involvement within a framework that links the community members to a specific social entity that shares practices and beliefs and, more specifically, to a repertoire of codes that delineate how they interact with each other in the community. The sustainability of teaching communities is enhanced when they are led by educators themselves, as this creates an organic infrastructure that is deeply embedded in the educational field. Such communities foster long-term professional development through peer learning and mentoring, establishing self-sustaining networks of expertise that can adapt and grow over time.

Studies on factors that support the formation of a professional learning community have identified four core characteristics: (1) collective learning that features reflective dialogue focusing on teaching and student learning, with teachers examining their implicit assumptions about teaching and learning; (2) collaboration, in which the teachers offer each other feedback and share knowledge; (3) peer learning, in which the teachers in the professional learning community have common tasks and goals and engage in collective inquiry on important questions of teaching and learning; and (4) a supportive and encouraging learning space, backed by the principal and the education administration [31,55]. In addition, studies found that focusing on inquiry and raising questions contribute to effective learning in teacher communities. Specifically, the shared experience of collecting data and reflecting on its meaning were key elements in fostering a feeling of success among the community’s participants [56].

1.3. The Research Questions

To explore how teachers conceptualized inclusion in education during their participation in professional learning communities, the following guiding question was formulated: How do teachers describe the process they underwent in the learning community that led them to reconceptualize the notion of inclusion in education? A secondary question was derived from the main question: How did this reconceptualization help the teachers create new and more inclusive teaching practices?

2. Materials and Methods

The study examined the change in process teachers underwent in peer communities while learning and practicing inclusion, focusing on dilemmas the teachers encountered in their schools. Since the objective was to gain an in-depth understanding of the participants’ experiences and views, the qualitative research method was chosen [57]. The interpretative–phenomenological approach was employed to gain a clear understanding of the participants’ experiences and how, in their view, these experiences affected their daily lives [57,58,59].

This study employed a qualitative phenomenological–interpretative research design to investigate the lived experiences of teachers in professional learning communities that chose to focus on inclusive education. This methodological approach was selected for several reasons: First, the phenomenological perspective allows for an in-depth exploration of participants’ subjective experiences. In this study, we investigated the teachers’ professional transformation, capturing the nuances of meaning construction vis-à-vis the concept of inclusion experienced through their participation in learning communities [59]. Second, the interpretative dimension of this approach acknowledges the researcher’s role in making sense of participants’ experiences while maintaining fidelity to their voices, which is essential when examining complex educational processes such as professional identity development and pedagogical change [58]. Third, this approach is particularly well suited for investigating phenomena that unfold over time and involve noteworthy shifts in perception and practice, which aligns with our research questions on how teachers reconceptualize inclusion and develop new practices [60]. Additionally, given the emotionally rich nature of teachers’ experiences with inclusive education and the complex social dynamics within professional communities, a qualitative phenomenological–interpretative approach provides the necessary methodological flexibility to capture these dimensions in ways that quantitative methods could not [61]. The research design incorporated multiple data collection methods—audio recordings, researcher observations, and reflective written responses—to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the phenomena under investigation and to enhance the trustworthiness of the findings through methodological triangulation [62].

2.1. Participants

The study involved ten professional learning communities comprising 156 teachers and school administrators from diverse educational settings across Israel. Participants were selected using purposive sampling based on the following criteria: (1) current employment as educators or administrators in schools; (2) willingness to participate in regular professional learning community meetings throughout an academic year; and (3) nomination by their school principals as potential leaders for implementing inclusive approaches. Our recruitment process involved contacting school principals across diverse geographical regions who then identified potential participants based on these criteria.

Participants represented a range of demographic characteristics, including varied teaching experience (1–30 years), educational roles (teachers, administrators, principals), school types (primary, secondary, special education, youth villages), geographical regions (northern, central, and southern Israel), and cultural backgrounds (Jewish and Arab educators).

Table 1. Participants Table. The Table describes the participants by groups, type of school, region, age of students, number of teachers in the community, the participants’ positions at the school, and years of experience as educators.

Group No.	School	Region	Grade	No. of Teachers	Participants	Years of Experience
1	Jewish youth village for at-risk youth	North	9–12	25	Teachers, administrators, principal	2–30
2	Arab primary school	North	1–6	20	Teachers, administrators, principal	5–20
3	A range of school frameworks—formal, informal, special education and regular education, Arab and Jewish	North	1–12 Special education: through age 21	13	Teachers from various schools and the director of informal education	3–13
4	Jewish and Arab secondary schools	North	7–12	12	Teachers from various schools	1–2
5	Jewish and Arab primary and middle schools	Center and south	1–9	23	Teachers from various schools	10–30
6	Jewish primary school	Center	1–6	3	Teacher, school adviser/counsel, principal	20+
7	Jewish primary school	South	1–6	6	5 teachers, principal	10–20
8	Arab primary school	Center	1–6	4	2 teachers, principal, vice principal	15–20
9	Arab primary and secondary schools	North, center, south	1–12	25	Teachers from various schools	3–30
10	Arab primary and secondary schools	North, center, south	1–12	25	Teachers from various schools	3–30

presents the key characteristics of each community group, including the school context, geographical region, grade levels taught, number of participants, professional roles, and years of teaching experience. The diversity among the groups reflects the heterogeneity within Israel’s education system, while their common denominator was a shared commitment to developing inclusive educational practices through professional learning communities (See Table 1).

The dissimilarities among the groups in this study reflect and demonstrate the diversity in the education system. The common denominator among the groups was the desire to fine tune the discourse and teaching practices to better address the needs of the students through the inclusion approach.

2.2. Data Collection Methods

Data collection employed three complementary methods to ensure comprehensive documentation of participants’ experiences. First, audio recordings captured all bi-weekly two-hour community meetings throughout the academic year, providing a complete record of verbal interactions, discussions, and the evolution of discourse over time. Second, structured observation notes were taken during each meeting, documenting non-verbal communication, group dynamics, emotional responses to discussion topics, and substantial moments of tension or breakthrough. Third, written reflective responses were collected from participants (See Appendix A) toward the conclusion of the academic year using structured prompts designed to elicit their retrospective accounts of personal and professional transformations. This triangulated approach provided rich data from multiple perspectives, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of participants’ developmental journeys through their engagement in professional learning communities focused on inclusive education.

2.3. Data Analysis Methodology

The analysis followed a rigorous process based on interpretative phenomenological analysis principles [59] and thematic analysis techniques [58]. Our approach included familiarization with the data, where both researchers thoroughly reviewed the complete dataset, including transcriptions of audio recordings, observation notes, and written reflections. This was followed by initial coding, with researchers independently conducting line-by-line coding of the data, generating initial codes that captured meaningful statements, experiences, and patterns. Through regular collaborative meetings, the researchers compared their independent coding, resolved discrepancies, and consolidated the initial codes into focused codes organized within emerging thematic categories. The identified themes were then reviewed against the coded extracts and the entire dataset, resulting in the identification of four major themes representing the developmental trajectory of teachers’ perspectives on inclusion. In the final analysis phase, the finalized themes were defined, named, and contextualized within the broader theoretical framework of inclusive education and professional development, with representative quotations selected to illustrate each theme.

To enhance the trustworthiness of the analysis, researcher triangulation was employed. Both researchers independently coded portions of the data and regularly compared their analyses to ensure consistency and reliability in the interpretation. Throughout the analysis, the researchers maintained reflective journals documenting methodological decisions, analytical insights, and personal reflections on how their positionality might influence the interpretation of the data.

2.4. Ethical Issues

After receiving approval from the college’s Ethics Committee, we contacted teachers who had participated in communities led by the principal researcher and invited them to participate in the study. We explained the research objectives and emphasized that the information they provided would remain anonymous and be used solely for research purposes. The teachers were told they were under no obligation to participate in the study and would not be adversely affected if they chose not to participate. We also explained that there would be no relationship involving authority or dependence because the educators had already completed their participation in communities led by the principal researcher. Regarding the study’s reliability, we, as researchers, were aware of the perceptions, views, and emotions we were liable to bring to the research. We discussed these concerns and were aware of them prior to embarking on the research. We helped each other focus on collecting and analyzing the findings in a way that was not influenced by our interpretations. We also consulted with the Ethics Committee and with colleagues on ways to collect and analyze data.

3. Results

The main objective of the joint forum of teachers and principals was to promote and facilitate the use of inclusion-based discourse while discussing the challenges that the teachers faced in the course of their work. Another important objective was to provide a framework where teachers could consult with each other on the right ways to respond to students and identify the triggers that cause them to respond as they do. The assumption was that understanding the motives behind their actions would enhance their ability to self-monitor, enabling them to choose a response that considers the other’s difficulties—a principle essential for creating an inclusive relationship.

The analysis of initial discussions and early reflective content revealed that, while approximately 90% of participants shared similar perspectives regarding classroom management and the scope of teacher responsibilities, some variation was observed. A small minority of participants began with more developed understandings of inclusion, particularly those with prior exposure to inclusive education frameworks. Our qualitative analysis did not identify systematic patterns of difference based on demographic variables, such as teaching experience, school type, cultural background, or gender. Contrary to previous research [63], teachers from both Jewish and Arab communities expressed similar initial conceptualizations of inclusion and disciplinary challenges. These initial attitudinal differences influenced individual developmental journeys in terms of pace, though the overall progression through the four themes remained consistent across all demographic groups. The analysis of data revealed four main themes reflecting teachers’ evolving perceptions of their role as inclusive educators.

Table 2. Summary of Themes in Teachers’ Development of Inclusive Practices. The Table presents a summary of the four developmental themes identified in teachers’ progression toward inclusive practices, outlining the essential characteristics of each stage and including illustrative quotations from study participants that exemplify their experiences.

Theme	Key Characteristics	Representative Quotes
Theme 1: “A disruptive student should be punished or removed from the classroom”	Rigid discipline stance; binary view of students; narrow teacher role; limited empathy; content focus over inclusion	“I believe inclusion was misinterpreted as a requirement to tolerate disruptive behavior. […] This translated into compromising classroom authority…”
Theme 2: “I discovered that I had been completely wrong!”	Recognition of misconceptions; professional identity shift; reframing inclusion; professional development need; self-reflection emergence	“At first, it was hard for me to understand what they were talking about in the meetings… But as we continued, I discovered that I had been completely wrong! I suddenly realized where I should be starting…”
Theme 3: “Without judgment or criticism”	Psychological safety; professional vulnerability; help seeking as strength; collegial trust; professional pride; internal validation	“The meeting triggered an indescribable change in me—in my thinking, planning… Others […] listened to my problems and dilemmas without judging or criticizing me but with a real desire to help…”
Theme 4: “The realization that it is possible to do things differently”	New inclusive practices; empathetic approach; supportive responses; reflective practice; relationship building; alternative approaches	“I learned to […] ask myself, ‘When a student is acting this way, what is he actually telling me?’”

summarizes these themes and their key characteristics and provides representative quotes from participants (See Table 2).

These four themes represent a developmental progression that teachers experienced through their participation in professional learning communities. The progression moved from initial resistance and rigid disciplinary approaches (Theme 1) through a pivotal moment of recognition (Theme 2), to the development of a supportive professional environment (Theme 3), and finally to the implementation of new inclusive practices (Theme 4). The following sections examine each of these themes in greater depth, illustrating the transformative journey teachers underwent as they developed more inclusive educational approaches.

3.1. Theme 1: “A Disruptive Student Should Be Punished or Removed from the Classroom”

The initial phase of the professional learning community meetings revealed deeply ingrained beliefs about classroom management and the scope of teacher responsibilities. Analysis of the discussions unveiled a predominant theme regarding teachers’ preliminary approaches to handling classroom disruptions and their understanding of inclusive education. This theme emerged consistently across different demographic groups within the participant pool, highlighting a shared mental model that preceded their engagement in the professional learning community.

I believe inclusion was misinterpreted as a requirement to tolerate disruptive behavior… This is translated into compromising classroom authority.

This perspective, articulated above, exemplifies many participants’ initial stance regarding classroom management and inclusion. The binary view of students as either “special needs” or “disciplinary cases” reflected a compartmentalized approach to student support, where empathy and understanding were reserved exclusively for formally identified special needs cases. Thus, one of the teachers explained, “Previously, my only association with the concept of inclusion was with students who have developmental, physical, or learning disabilities”.

She added that this perception caused her to distance herself from students. As a new high school teacher, she prioritized covering curriculum content and exam preparation over developing an inclusive approach.

This quote reflects another aspect of teachers’ role perception, which was found among 95% of the participants, namely, that an empathic, understanding, and inclusive approach is appropriate only when dealing with student populations that are recognized as having special needs. Any disruptive behavior from the remaining students must be addressed using disciplinary measures.

In other words, the teachers conveyed a very narrow view of their role, which amounted to maintaining discipline in the classroom to ensure that they had optimal conditions for teaching and learning to take place. Every day, teachers encounter complex situations that require attention; however, they believe that addressing such situations is beyond their purview. As the community discussions delved deeper, approximately 90% of the teachers—whether novice or experienced, Arab or Jewish, religious or secular—arrived at a different perception of the teacher’s role, which leads us to the second theme.

3.2. Theme 2: “I Discovered That I Had Been Completely Wrong!”

In meeting after meeting, the foundations of the teachers’ beliefs regarding their role were questioned during their discussions as they debated and argued and fearfully observed what was being revealed. To the onlooker, it seemed at times that the participants were trying to resist the new revelation; gradually, the group facilitator understood that the teachers’ emotive response was developing and leading to a new and greater insight, as the following quote demonstrates.

At first, it was hard for me to understand what they were talking about in the meetings… But as we continued, I discovered that I had been completely wrong! I suddenly realized where I should be starting and what I needed to do.

As the discourse became more open and the teachers became more involved, expressing their opinions and raising questions and doubts, the atmosphere in the group became calmer, and there was less resistance. Having the option to openly express and share emotions and thoughts—even if these differed from the common consensus—created a calmer and more trusting community atmosphere. As the learning progressed, the teachers found clarity and were thus able to reframe their beliefs about the teacher’s role. During the discussion, it became evident that the teachers needed to receive positive reinforcement regarding their identity as teachers. This need is expressed in the following quote, as one of the participants reflected on how the discussion impacted his professional development:

This discussion helped me understand whether I was doing things well and correctly. […] The presentation and discussion helped me gain a more profound understanding of the theoretical significance of the inclusion approach.

He explained that the meetings exposed him to previously unknown knowledge about handling complex student situations and noted that this experience transformed his perspective from one based on authority and hierarchy to a more inclusive approach.

This second theme represents an important stage in the development of the perception of the community participants’ role. At this stage, the teachers have clarified and conceptualized the cause of their distress. More than 90% of the participants had identified and described the main reasons for their rigid and disciplinary responses, among them, fear of appearing unprofessional or lacking knowledge, confusion, and helplessness when confronting challenging situations, and a sense of being left alone to contend with complex issues, without the benefit of professional accompaniment. The progression from this stage to the next was practically inevitable.

3.3. Theme 3: “Without Judgment or Criticism”

The discussion focusing on teachers and what is essential for them facilitated a genuine, professional, and candid discourse. One teacher described the profound impact of the meetings:

The meeting triggered an indescribable change in me—in my thinking, planning, and implementation. […] Others really listened to my problems and dilemmas without judging or criticizing me but with a real desire to help.

She explained that the discourse in the forum created a space of non-judgmental listening; additionally, she understood that it was legitimate and even advisable to seek assistance and consult with colleagues or professionals.

The discussions in the community forums became observational, professional, and calmer because teachers had a better sense of their role and their ability to control it. Their role perception now originated from a more holistic and internalized conceptualization; they no longer felt distressed or defensive.

The more protected and valued the teachers felt in the learning community, the greater the pride they found in being teachers:

I suddenly realized what powers and resources are at my disposal as a teacher… I felt pride in the fact that I chose this profession and pride in the great responsibility on my shoulders.

Before participating in the community, the teachers had felt judged and criticized; however, their own thoughts were their greatest source of criticism and judgment. As soon as they realized that they could benefit from each other’s support, listening, understanding, and encouragement, their internal criticism subsided, and they focused on the resources at their disposal.

The brainstorming, mutual reinforcement, and joint effort to identify what else they can do all combined to strengthen the professional confidence of the teachers, boosting readiness to dare to try something new or make changes:

The process I went through in the meetings was very important for me. First of all, I learned to believe in myself, to believe that I’m a positive influence on the students and that I am able to understand and address their needs… I came to believe that the power and tools to act are within me… I learned about myself, recognizing what drives me crazy, what is easy for me to deal with, and what is difficult—and what to do when it’s difficult.

Even the more novice among the teachers were able to share their innermost thoughts.

I’m a new teacher, so at first, I didn’t think it was appropriate to present incidents and share. I felt confused. The best metaphor to describe what I felt is that I have a puzzle of 1000 pieces, and I barely manage to even put together the frame... But as the year went by, I realized that I was not the only one to feel that way. By sharing, I got to know the thinking and personalities of the staff... I felt that the staff supported the person who was presenting, even though the ideas were not always the same. In the last meeting, I shared that I felt that professionally and personally, I had experienced a major developmental shift over the year. My confidence in my ability to help my students was now higher than it was at the beginning of the year.

The connection through new knowledge and personal interaction led to an experience of intimacy, belonging, and togetherness—which is the same experience of inclusion that we wish to give to our students. Indeed, the community of teachers provided a model of inclusion and created a space for each teacher in the group. This personal experience immediately led the teachers to seek out new practices that would reflect their newly acquired approach toward inclusion.

3.4. Theme 4: “The Realization That It Is Possible to Do Things Differently”

By the time the teachers were very prepared to question their past actions, they were also ready to change, to invent and experiment with a different response. The teachers’ new actions now take into consideration the needs of the other side in a very empathetic way, with the aim of forming a connection. This type of approach was less common among the teachers previously. At this stage, there was also openness to be exposed and supported by the teacher community. In addition, the experience of belonging to an intimate support group that shares the same difficulties and questions gave the teachers professional confidence and motivation to create a similar experience for their students. One teacher described her experience in the teacher community as follows:

I learned to interpret an incident: I learned to ask myself the following question, ’When students act up this way, what are they telling me about themselves and their needs?’… From now on, I will practice thinking before I respond.

In these statements, we can see the teacher’s ability to recognize what is difficult for her and where she has succeeded in making progress. She can also say where she manages to act effectively and what helps her in this. The same exercises used in the community—introspection, identifying strengths and difficulties, and boosting the ability to share and consult—have all helped the teacher dare to act similarly in the classroom vis-à-vis her pupils.

I discovered that I can be strict without being harsh. It’s important to get used to the idea that gentleness is a very nurturing quality… I feel that today, I know better when to stop problematic situations from developing instead of feeling cornered. Rather than locking horns with them, I try to create a significant connection and a sense of trust… I try to remember that behind each person’s words and actions, there’s an important background that has a sweeping influence on their behavior.

The teachers learned to conduct an internal dialogue that helps them recognize their emotions, their strengths and weaknesses, who they can turn to for support, and how they can do better. Both the internal and the external dialogue are based on a sense of inner control, a sense of pride in their role, a true understanding, and a professional conceptualization of their role and its implications.

Such written comments convey a sense of the profound conversations the participants engaged in among themselves and about themselves within the community forum. The word “surrender”, which was used at the beginning of the journey, was replaced with “gentleness”. To act gently was no longer something to be ashamed of, nor was it viewed as surrendering to students’ negativity. Rather, it was now seen as a process for building a trusting relationship. Pausing, and placing a question mark to gain a better understanding of the student, these reactions no longer posed a risk to the teachers, and they no longer tried to appear “perfect” or unrelenting as teachers. This marks an enormous improvement from the fear and suspicion that characterized the community’s members at the outset. Their longing for a more personable connection was also expressed in the ways they treated the students, as the following quote demonstrates. One teacher recounted how she learned to change her approach to disruptive students: “I gained a clearer understanding of the importance of my relationship with my students. Therefore, I must be more present for them and really see them[…]”. She described how, instead of punishing and sending a disruptive student to the principal’s office, as she had previously, she decided to talk to and listen to the student. The teacher explained that in such cases, after a series of conversations, the disruptive behaviors ceased, and by the end of the school year, these students even thanked her.

The teacher’s behavior, in this case, illustrates the substantial change she underwent. The teacher learned to create a connection from a position of gentle authority and a desire to listen to what the student had to say, as opposed to rigid authority and a distancing approach. She tried to find additional interpretations for the student’s behavior and made a practice of listening to him. The teacher used soft practices to cultivate a relationship and give him a sense of belonging in accordance with the principles of the inclusive approach. She applied the practices she learned with the community—asking questions, conducting self-reflection, and weighing different ways to address the difficulty.

4. Discussion

This study observed teaching communities in the process of reframing the role of the teacher in school. The reconceptualization of the teacher’s role was accomplished through learning in teacher-led learning communities, where teachers learn together in an inclusive approach. This experience refines the ability of staff members to observe the details in the framework and streamline their teaching practices accordingly. There is a clear connection between the concepts of equality and inclusion. Egalitarian education systems ensure that students fulfill their academic potential regardless of personal and social circumstances, including factors such as gender, ethnicity, special needs, or giftedness [45]. The study aimed to help teachers recognize the significance of their central role as they accompany students through their schooling process and, consequently, to re-examine and reframe their educational mission. To this end, two means were employed: the first was participation in a learning community of teachers, thus addressing the need for a supportive think tank, and the second was learning the concepts and principles of the inclusive approach, which provided a theoretical framework for the process of change.

This approach to teacher development through learning communities resonates with research that found successful professional communities create a sustainable infrastructure for long-term change by fostering collective responsibility and shared leadership [64]. Our findings extend this work by demonstrating the specific developmental trajectory teachers experienced when transitioning toward inclusive education practices within supportive community structures. While some researchers emphasized administrative support as a critical factor in community sustainability [29], our study highlights how the internal transformation of teachers’ professional identity serves as the primary driver of sustainable change. This difference suggests that, while structural support is important, deeper psychological and professional transformations may be more powerful catalysts for substantial educational reform in inclusive settings.

The study focused on a central research question: How did teachers describe the process they underwent in the learning community that led them to reconceptualize the notion of inclusion in education? The findings demonstrate that teacher-led communities serve as sustainable infrastructure for professional development as they create self-perpetuating systems of knowledge-sharing and support that emerge from within the educational field itself. This organic development ensures that professional learning remains relevant and adaptable while building lasting capacity for continuous improvement. The sustainability of this model is enhanced by its connection to authentic classroom experiences and its ability to foster ongoing peer mentoring relationships. These findings not only illuminate the stages of teachers’ development in inclusive education but also reveal the sustainable nature of change when it emerges through professional learning communities. The organic development of these communities, coupled with their ongoing nature, creates a self-sustaining cycle where professional growth and inclusive practices reinforce each other [24,54].

Four themes were identified in the discourse that evolved in these communities as the teachers reviewed their role perceptions vis-vis the principles that underlie the inclusive approach. The four themes were as follows: (1) “A disruptive student should be punished or removed from the classroom”. In the first stage, the goal of the community meetings was to understand the source of the severity that characterized the teachers’ reactions and their general tendency to reject gentler educational approaches, such as the inclusive approach. (2) “I discovered that I had been completely wrong!” This important theme served as a turning point in teachers’ role conception. (3) ”Without judgment or criticism”. This theme demonstrates the teachers’ reconceptualization of their role, according to which the notion of the perfect and unerring teacher was replaced with a more human and personable figure who seeks to ask questions and consult with others without fearing judgment or criticism. (4) “The realization that it is possible to do things differently”. This theme relates to the teachers’ ability to reframe their teaching practices to adopt ones that are more effective and inclusive.

These four developmental stages both confirm and extend research on “problems of practice” in teaching communities [65]. While Horn and Little identified how teachers’ discourse around practical problems created opportunities for learning, our study illuminates the emotional and identity-based dimensions that accompany this learning process. Our findings on the progression from resistance to acceptance provide empirical support for Kelchterman’s theoretical work on teachers’ self-understanding [66]. This emotional dimension of professional learning communities has been underexplored in previous research, with some researchers being among the few to emphasize how teacher vulnerability plays a critical role in professional development.

Furthermore, the communities’ evolution through distinct developmental phases aligns with the concept of “inquiry as stance”, where teachers move from viewing teaching as technical implementation to understanding it as a complex inquiry process [67]. However, while Cochran-Smith and Lytle focused primarily on individual teacher development, our study demonstrates how collective inquiry within sustainable communities accelerates this transformation process and makes it more likely to result in institutional change.

The professional literature in the field indicates that teachers tend to interpret students’ transgressions and behavioral difficulties as demonstrations of disobedience requiring disciplinary action. This attitude led teachers to use mechanisms of policing, tracking, and screening in response to such incidents. For the most part, these treatment methods were doomed to fail because they did not consider the needs of the students; however, the sense of failure triggered harsh emotional experiences in both the teachers and the students [31]. Given that classroom diversity is expected to grow, as well as the challenges this presents, it is crucial that policymakers and teachers learn how to respond to such challenges more effectively. Consequently, the inclusive approach, which generates broad multicultural awareness that affords support for students of different backgrounds and needs [41], was selected to guide the discourse among teachers in the learning communities.

The four developmental stages identified in this study align with principles of sustainable development in education, where change is viewed as a long-term, transformative process rather than a short-term intervention [34,41]. This alignment manifests in several ways: First, the progression from resistance to acceptance reflects the deep structural change necessary for sustainable development. Second, the communities’ ability to generate ongoing professional discourse demonstrates the self-sustaining nature of peer learning [56]. Third, the transformation of teaching practices represents the kind of systemic change that characterizes sustainable educational reform [31]. Finally, the development of new inclusive practices indicates the creation of lasting infrastructures that can support continuous adaptation and growth [48]. Using theoretical conceptualizations in the initial stage of the discourse was found to be reassuring to participants because it postponed the stage of exposing personal content and instead provided a rational explanation for the behaviors and reactions. Findings from the current study indicated that 90% of all teachers in the communities perceived their main role to be enforcing discipline in the classroom, maintaining order, and controlling students’ conduct. The option of a gentler or “softer” response was countered by teachers’ serious concern regarding loss of authority; moreover, any suggestion of a conciliatory, attentive, patient, inclusive, or non-disciplinary approach was seen as a therapeutic response beyond the purview of the teacher educator. This may explain why students with difficulties were immediately referred to a professional therapist, and the teachers refrained from addressing the students directly. In this sense, teachers were afraid to truly understand what a student was going through because they considered this the role of the school counselor or therapist. However, maintaining an open dialogue is not therapy, and teachers need to be taught how to address their students confidently and understand their experiences. This approach allowed teachers to develop meaningful relationships with students and to formulate a less severe and more humane perception of their role.

This finding mirrors previous research on teacher resilience, which demonstrated that rigid disciplinary approaches often stem from teachers’ professional vulnerability rather than from pedagogical conviction [68]. However, while other studies focused primarily on individual teacher resilience, our study reveals how collaborative communities can create collective resilience that transforms individual practice. Teachers’ binary view of students as either “having special needs” or “cases that call for the use of disciplinary measures”, which emerged in our initial findings, also corresponds with the critique of traditional education systems’ tendency to create artificial categorizations that inhibit true inclusion [11]. A progression beyond these binary distinctions, as we observed in teacher communities, represents a major contribution to understanding how inclusive education theory can be translated into practice.

Subsequently, the ongoing discussions and the sharing of the various positions revealed a mixture of difficult emotions that prevented the teachers from thinking logically or opening to new and gentler approaches. The participants’ mutual support, acceptance, and lack of judgmental attitudes, as well as the voicing of rational explanations and alternative response options, led to greater moderation in the teachers’ professional and personal positions and the ability to recognize the personal and professional gain that can arise from releasing positions of power and moving toward a shared discourse. This tonal change in discourse led teachers to get to know their students and make decisions regarding the appropriate ways to react and respond. This contrasts with the common educational reality, in which official committees make many decisions without input from the relevant teachers [69,70]. The teachers’ understanding that they are necessary and important helped soften their previously severe and discipline-based role perception. As the teachers realized that the discourse in the communities led to introspection and new insights into themselves and their power as teachers, they agreed to seek assistance. In addition, the participatory discourse promoted the development of practical educational tools. A study by [71] sheds light on this topic and suggests that teachers’ requests for support stemmed mostly from their need for action tools and strategies. Hence, regular team meetings should be arranged to share, relieve loneliness, and address needs.

The study’s secondary research question examined: How did the reconceptualization of inclusion in education help teachers create new and more inclusive teaching practices? The study demonstrated that working through theoretical conceptualizations and interpreting their meaning through case studies reduced the teachers’ objections and stress levels, piqued their interest, and led to a desire to experiment. Furthermore, participating in an honest and open discourse increased the teachers’ sense of professionalism and inspired them to enter the educational field adequately prepared according to their renewed role perception. To this end, they sought and adopted suitable practices. During community learning, the teachers experienced and participated in circles of inclusion, where they felt they were seen, understood, and appreciated. These experiences, which replaced the earlier overwhelming and difficult emotions experienced in the classrooms, were the kind they wished to pass on to their students. They acquired the necessary patience to listen to and react differently to students’ difficulties. Their former entrenchment in a role perception that was rigid and strict had dissipated, and in its place, there emerged a benevolent authority figure whose aim was to establish a relationship with students based on trust, attentiveness, and containment.

However, during the process in the learning communities, a more complex understanding of teacher cooperation was developed, from “transferring information and responsibility” to building a professional partnership that combines the knowledge and tools of the cooperating parties. According to [31], by offering additional interpretations of daily events, the professionals who accompany the educational team’s discourse were able to help teachers reframe their experience, especially in cases of challenging educational events.

Returning to the main research question that examined how teachers described the process by which they reformulated the concept of inclusion in education, the findings indicated that the following four stages of development formed the basis for the shift in their role perception: (a) “A disruptive student should be punished or removed from the classroom”, i.e., an examination of the existing attitudes, in comparison with other attitudinal options retrieved from the theoretical literature; (b) “I discovered that I had been completely wrong!”, i.e., a turning point was reached following the open and honest discussion conducted among colleagues; (c) “Without judgment or criticism”, i.e., focusing on teachers’ essential needs facilitated genuine, professional, and candid discourse; and (d) “The realization that it is possible to do things differently”, i.e., effective teaching practices were formulated in light of the reconceptualization of inclusion. These stages created a transition from an authoritarian and rigid conceptualization of the teacher’s role to an authoritative, attentive, and inclusion-based role perception. In addition, new teaching practices were developed and adopted, which enhanced the teachers’ sense of competence and their willingness to deal with complex events. These stages resulted from applying the community development model to the content area of inclusion in education, whereby teachers provide mutual feedback, share knowledge, jointly explore important questions of teaching and learning, and create a supportive and encouraging learning space [31,55,56]. This corresponds with the fact that inclusion is at the forefront of UNESCO’s work and focuses on the ability of the education system to provide equitable learning opportunities for all. To achieve this, policies and practices aimed at inclusion must be developed, and teachers’ role in developing such practices cannot be overstated [31,34].

The findings indicate that ongoing guidance in a community that engages in theoretical learning, shares and discusses challenges, and trains in addressing them can boost the professional confidence and emotional resilience of teachers, help them assess their actions, and identify possible alternatives. The underlying premise is that by examining their teaching experiences—including their successes, frustrations, and doubts—in the peer group setting, teachers can better understand the factors that contribute to confrontational incidents and thus gain insight into their students’ perspectives. A regular weekly meeting of teachers geared toward facilitating candid discourse and focused on examining their ways of thinking, their actions, and their emotions [52] can help strengthen the teachers’ professional identity and sense of belonging [54] and promote the development of new and effective skills the teachers can use in working with their students. The study’s findings underscore the need for teachers to stay informed about professional theoretical concepts that arise in the field of education, such as suicidal ideation, the use of addictive substances, and other risk factors. This need mainly stems from the teachers’ sense of responsibility for their students and the desire to reassure themselves that they are acting correctly. Thus, the main work in the discourse groups is to help teachers understand where they are acting correctly and to encourage them to overcome the fear of sharing their difficulties and uncertainties. The community’s help in translating the inclusive approach from theory into specific work practices, including practice simulations in the group, can boost the teachers’ confidence in adopting this approach in their classrooms.

The current study was conducted in diverse communities that included teachers with varying characteristics in terms of age, seniority, and gender. The communities included groups of Arab teachers only, Jewish teachers only, and mixed groups of teachers from both sectors. No substantial differences were found between the communities in terms of teachers’ emotional and professional experiences. The professional dilemmas, emotional turmoil, and deliberations that arose were similar in all communities, regardless of the religious or cultural affiliation of the participants. However, the study identified notable differences related to specific local and community characteristics, such as attitudes to authority, behavioral norms, and the language spoken in the community; nevertheless, these differences were unrelated to participants’ sociocultural affiliation. This finding contrasts with those of a previous study conducted in Israel’s Arab sector [63], which found substantial differences between the professional development process in Jewish and Arab schools, suggesting that in Arab schools, the process evolves more slowly and is characterized by stronger resistance to change.

Our findings regarding the lack of substantive demographic differences in teachers’ responses to inclusive education merit further discussion. While some variation was observed in participants’ initial attitudes toward inclusion, these differences appeared to be more closely related to individual professional experiences rather than demographic factors. Teachers who entered the study with more developed inclusive perspectives typically engaged more readily with the reflective practices introduced in early community sessions, as evidenced by their contributions to group discussions. Those who initially expressed stronger resistance to inclusive approaches required more extended engagement with Theme 1 (“A disruptive student should be punished or removed from the classroom”), spending additional time working through their rigid disciplinary perspectives before transitioning to subsequent themes. Nevertheless, all participants eventually progressed through the full developmental sequence, albeit at different paces.

Importantly, by the conclusion of the study, our analysis of final reflective writings indicated a remarkable convergence of perspectives across participants, regardless of their initial positioning or demographic characteristics. This finding suggests that, while individual journeys varied in pace and intensity, the community-based intervention effectively supported transformative learning across diverse educational contexts and backgrounds, with the four-stage developmental progression maintaining its relevance regardless of teachers’ initial perspectives. This convergence contrasts with [63]’s finding of substantive differences in professional development processes between Jewish and Arab schools, suggesting that structured professional learning communities may help transcend cultural and contextual differences when focused on inclusive education principles.

The voices heard in this large study population, consisting of diverse teachers, reflected attitudes, perceptions, thoughts, and emotions that inhibited teachers’ attempts to adopt new behavior patterns. Participating in a learning community where they can share internal deliberations about their professional identity as well as the challenging professional dilemmas they encounter may promote teachers’ professional development and help them implement innovative and inclusive work practices, strengthening their personal and professional resilience. In addition to presenting the outcomes of the community work, the study also outlined the stages of community facilitation, demonstrating how to promote joint work in teacher communities and alleviate the sense of loneliness that characterizes teachers’ work.

These findings contribute to the theoretical understanding of teacher learning communities as sustainable infrastructures for educational change. Our research extends beyond the structural characteristics of effective learning communities identified by Stoll and colleagues [28] to illuminate the developmental processes through which these communities transform teacher practice. The four-stage model that emerged from our study provides a theoretical framework for understanding how teacher learning communities specifically support the implementation of inclusive education practices, extending beyond general professional development models [24].

This study also addresses a gap in the literature identified by researchers who noted the need for research that examines how teacher development for inclusive education addresses both technical skills and deeper attitudinal changes [17]. Our findings demonstrate that sustainable change requires attention to both dimensions, with professional communities serving as the context in which technical and attitudinal transformations can occur simultaneously. This integration of inclusive education’s technical and attitudinal dimensions represents a meaningful theoretical contribution to understanding how sustainable educational change occurs. Additionally, our findings can be contrasted with those of researchers who found that effective professional learning communities must maintain a persistent focus on student learning [72]. While our research confirms the importance of this focus, it also reveals that teacher communities must first address teachers’ emotional and identity needs before they can effectively shift their attention to student-centered approaches. This sequence of development adds nuance to the existing literature on professional learning communities.

While our findings offer promising insights into how teacher learning communities facilitate transformation toward inclusive practices, critically examining challenges across diverse contexts is essential. Cultural and systemic contexts influence effectiveness, with hierarchical systems struggling to cultivate the open discourse necessary for transformation. Contextual factors mediate how inclusive education is implemented [3]. Resource constraints create barriers, with regular meetings demanding considerable time from overburdened teachers [5]. Transferability across diversity types presents additional challenges, as our study primarily focused on behavioral challenges and special needs, while schools face intersecting dimensions of diversity. The applicability to other dimensions remains questionable, especially where teachers hold entrenched beliefs about certain populations [73]. Sustainability represents perhaps the most substantial challenge, as our study captured only a focused period of development, with long-term maintenance requiring further investigation. Educational change requires attention to depth, breadth, endurance, justice, diversity, resourcefulness, and conservation [74]. These challenges highlight the need for contextually sensitive approaches, with educational leaders considering their specific context, anticipating barriers, and developing proactive strategies.

4.1. Practical Implications for Teacher Education

This study has substantial practical implications for teacher education in inclusive education. Teacher preparation programs should incorporate sustained learning communities rather than relying solely on short-term workshops. Based on our findings, we recommend a multi-phase approach for implementing effective learning communities: (1) establishing psychological safety where facilitators acknowledge teachers’ initial resistance when confronting beliefs about inclusion, creating judgment-free spaces for expressing concerns. Timperley et al. [75] suggest this requires skilled facilitation that balances challenging assumptions while maintaining trust; (2) implementing structured dialogue protocols, as transformation occurs through professional discourse connecting theoretical knowledge with practical classroom situations, helping bridge the theory-practice gap identified by Florian and Spratt [76]; (3) integrating reflection with action through a cyclical process where teachers experiment with inclusive practices, document experiences, and return for collective analysis, reflecting Ainscow’s [77] emphasis on evidence-based reflection; (4) ensuring administrative support and resource allocation, as sustainability requires institutional commitment. Mission [78] argues structural support is necessary for translating individual growth into systemic change and (5) establishing cross-role and cross-school networks to accelerate the spread of inclusive practices.

Implementation requires a fundamental shift from knowledge transmission to collaborative inquiry. Teacher education programs should prepare pre-service teachers with both knowledge about inclusion and skills to participate in professional learning communities [79]. This is consistent with recent findings that documented how participants in teacher education learning communities valued the experience of listening to their own and others’ voices, which facilitated deeper professional reflection and collaborative knowledge construction [80]. For in-service teachers, education systems should create pathways for teacher leaders to facilitate learning communities within schools [81]. Additionally, the four-stage developmental trajectory identified can serve as a diagnostic tool for understanding teachers’ journey toward inclusive practice, allowing more targeted interventions. Recognizing that resistance often precedes transformation helps facilitators respond more effectively to initial reluctance, viewing it as a natural stage rather than opposition.

4.2. The Study’s Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research

The current study has several limitations. It was conducted among communities that underwent a process during a certain period, so we should be cautious about applying its conclusions to other groups at other points in time. The participants in the study represent a diverse population in many ways, including the type of educational framework in which they work, their geographical region, the ages of the students they teach, the number of participants in each community, the roles of the participants (e.g., teacher, principal, etc.), gender, nationality, and seniority in the education system. Notwithstanding the diversity of the study population, the findings may not necessarily be indicative of the overall population of educators. Another limitation concerns the period when data were collected, which was during the last year of the global COVID pandemic, which had a profound impact on the education system. If the study had been conducted at a different point in time or for a longer duration, perhaps the findings in the same communities would have been different.

Follow-up research could extend this study by exploring additional communities and exploring different stages of teachers’ professional development, from initial training through advanced career phases. Subsequent investigations aim to trace the transformative processes identified here across diverse educational contexts while carefully preserving their core conceptual elements. By studying the same participants at more advanced stages and exploring various cultural dimensions, researchers can gain deeper insights into the sustainability and adaptability of professional learning communities’ approach to inclusive education. Future studies can particularly investigate how these transformative processes can be integrated into initial teacher education programs to support early-career teachers in developing inclusive pedagogical approaches.

4.3. The Study’s Contribution

The current study enriches the discourse on inclusive education and deepens our understanding of teachers’ perceptions and practices regarding inclusive approaches in education. It contributes to the broader context of professional educator development and growth. The study illuminates how theoretical knowledge from academic research on inclusion can be meaningfully integrated into teachers’ professional development settings. Through exploring perceptions of inclusion and co-creating practical tools, the study bridges theoretical knowledge with teachers’ lived experiences in the classroom, strengthening their capacity to implement sustainable, inclusive practices.

Central to this research is the nurturing of learning and thinking processes within teacher learning communities. Through mutual encouragement and open dialogue, teachers collectively refine their understanding of inclusion while discovering and enhancing their daily inclusive teaching practices. This collaborative process leads to a profound reconceptualization of the teacher’s role and responsibilities in creating inclusive educational environments. This transformation process, emerging from within the educational field itself, exemplifies the potential of bottom-up change to create lasting impact, aligning with broader goals of sustainable development in education. Furthermore, by cultivating sustainable professional communities that support both teacher and student well-being, this study illustrates how educational infrastructure can be developed to enhance human well-being while promoting sustainable, inclusive practices.

These findings directly contribute to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 4 on quality education, particularly target 4.c, which focuses on increasing the supply of qualified teachers [34]. Moreover, this study validates important synergies between multiple SDGs, particularly the interconnections between SDG4 (Quality Education) and SDG3 (Good Health and Well-being), as sustainable professional communities enhance both educational quality and human well-being. The study indicates how professional learning communities can create sustainable teacher development pathways while advancing inclusive education practices that support target 4.5 on eliminating educational disparities [45]. The power of this approach lies in its organic development and self-sustaining nature, as evidenced by the rich experiences of participating teachers. Through rich narratives and lived experiences, this study reveals how teacher-led professional communities weave sustainable educational infrastructure that nurtures ongoing teacher development and inclusive practices. These communities, emerging organically from within schools, cultivate self-perpetuating systems of professional learning that embody a sustainable model for profound inclusive educational transformation. The stories and voices captured in this research reflect how such communities embrace inclusive education in ways that can adapt and evolve to meet future challenges while maintaining their core principles and effectiveness over time.

To conclude, this study’s findings contribute to understanding sustainability in inclusive education. Our research illuminates five key dimensions of sustainability in this context: First, the four-stage developmental process we identified reveals the psychological foundations necessary for sustainable, inclusive practices. Unlike temporary compliance with policies, the deep conceptual shifts documented in the teaching communities represent internal transformations likely to endure over time [82]. The progression from punitive approaches to inclusive practices demonstrates a fundamental reconceptualization that creates lasting infrastructure for inclusive teaching. Second, the professional community structure provides a sustainable inclusive education ecosystem. The self-perpetuating nature of these communities—where knowledge is collectively constructed and refined—creates a model less dependent on external expertise or temporary initiatives. This aligns with [27] the concept of “collaborative professionalism”, which emphasizes the sustainability advantages of teacher-driven professional development. Third, the emotional support mechanisms embedded in these communities address teacher well-being and resilience—critical but often overlooked aspects of sustainability. By providing spaces for teachers to express vulnerability and receive affirmation, these communities cultivate the emotional sustainability necessary for long-term commitment to inclusive education [83]. Fourth, this collaborative approach promotes efficient resource use by leveraging expertise already present within schools. Rather than relying primarily on external consultants, this approach creates what [15] terms “resource-efficient inclusion”, maximizing existing human capital through strategic collaboration, which is particularly important in resource-constrained environments. Finally, our developmental framework explains why many inclusion initiatives fail despite initial enthusiasm and offers a roadmap for implementation that acknowledges the necessary stages. This process-oriented perspective contributes to understanding how sustainable change in inclusive education occurs [84]. These insights suggest that educational systems seeking sustainable inclusive approaches should prioritize establishing infrastructure for ongoing teacher communities rather than focusing exclusively on short-term training. Sustainability metrics should expand beyond student outcomes to include indicators of teacher community vitality and conceptual transformation—factors our research suggests are crucial for long-term sustainability in inclusive education.