Rethinking Micro-Exclusion Practices in Rural Primary School Classrooms: Perspectives and Reflections from Teachers

Abstract

The research problematises the different micro-exclusion practices in rural primary schools and their impact on learners’ participation and academic development. Rural primary school classrooms perpetuate systemic micro-exclusion of learners in various ways, reflecting injustice and a colossal squandering of human potential. All learners, at some point, in the same learning spaces often face different classroom experiences as they are subtly excluded through teacher commissions and omissions. The paper presents an exploration of the phenomenon of micro-exclusion practices in rural primary school classrooms, drawing on the perspectives and reflections of six primary school teachers. Using a qualitative phenomenological multi-case study design, we explore the everyday behavioral activities of these teachers through in-depth semi-structured interviews and non-participant observation to uncover their experiences and insights regarding subtle micro-exclusionary practices that impact learner participation and inclusivity. It responds to two questions: how do teachers micro-exclude learners during teaching and learning in rural primary schools in Zimbabwe, and what mitigation strategies can be implemented to minimise micro-exclusion in rural primary school classrooms? Findings revealed that micro-exclusion affects all learners and is multifaceted. It exists and manifests in the form of social isolation, subtle biases in attention, and disparities in feedback, which have a strong bearing on learners’ participation. Teachers reported varying degrees of awareness and challenges concerning micro-exclusion practices and expressed a desire to address implicit or explicit biases and foster greater participation in classroom environments. The study highlights the importance of reflective practices among rural primary school teachers and suggests strategies for creating an inclusive participatory atmosphere that mitigates micro-exclusion.

1. Introduction

Rural primary school classrooms continue to experience systemic micro-exclusion that marginalises learners in various ways, thereby perpetuating injustice and representing a significant squander of human potential (Harsma 2021; Sue and Spanierman 2020). Despite this, most countries, including Zimbabwe, are committed to the principle of inclusive education, aiming to provide all learners in the same learning spaces with equal opportunities. This aligns with Sustainable Development Goal Number 4, which advocates for inclusive, equitable, and quality education and the promotion of lifelong learning opportunities for all (Zickafoose et al. 2024). In Zimbabwean rural primary schools, classrooms remain inherently heterogeneous, comprising learners from different backgrounds, abilities, personality styles, languages, and cultures all learning together (Demo et al. 2021).

Emphasis has been placed on the importance of inclusive education both as a means to achieve positive educational outcomes and as a moral imperative. Inclusive education has been widely recognised and articulated as a fundamental human right inherent to every individual (Cologon 2020). Theoretically, several scholars contend that inclusion encompasses both access to mainstream educational spaces and the experiential dimension of inclusion, often conceptualized as a sense of belonging (Nizic and Carlbacker 2023). Achieving true inclusion within classrooms is a vital goal, particularly in contexts marked by pronounced inequalities, such as Zimbabwean rural educational settings (Potterton and Kimbala 2024). However, the rural classroom spaces frequently hinder educational participation for all learners. Collocating diverse learners within the same classroom does not guarantee social and academic inclusion, as subtle pedagogical practices and interactions, which are micro-exclusion, may inadvertently marginalise certain learners. These exclusionary behaviours exemplify what D’Alessio (2011), as cited in Dukpa et al. (2024a, 2024b), has termed micro-exclusion. All learners are susceptible to micro-exclusion at some point, regardless of their age, gender, social and economic background, and cognitive abilities (Inan-Kaya and Rubie-Davies 2022). It is important to note that micro-exclusion is generally not a permanent or fixed feature within rural classrooms; rather, these implicit and unintentional acts of exclusion are most frequently performed unconsciously and without deliberate intent.

The Zimbabwean rural primary school classroom is a complex and dynamic environment characterized by diverse learners. However, it often presents significant challenges stemming from resource limitations, inadequate educational infrastructure, a legacy of economic hardship, and learners walking long distances to attend school. These factors collectively undermine learners’ academic success. While rural primary school classrooms are designed to welcome and recognise the diverse contributions of learners from various backgrounds and facilitate inclusive learning environments where different groups learn alongside one another for mutual benefit, the reality is that multiple micro-exclusion practices within the interactional and instructional contexts serve as a barrier to full participation for some rural learners. These subtle forms of exclusion deprive rural learners of equitable and meaningful classroom experiences as they curtail active engagement in the teaching-learning process. Despite the overarching goal that all learners should be provided with conducive conditions and interactive environments, micro-exclusion persists, depriving rural learners of vital classroom experiences essential for successful learning outcomes.

The empirical paper explores the perspectives of six rural primary classroom teachers with a focus on their lived realities within classroom settings and how they enact micro-exclusionary practices, either covertly or overtly, and the subsequent impact on learner participation. The findings reveal deeply ingrained micro-exclusion practices as perceived and experienced by rural primary school teachers. Notably, there is a significant gap in existing literature concerning micro-exclusion in rural primary schools. The topic remains under-debated in Zimbabwe’s primary education discourse, particularly given the persistent marginalisation of rural educational spaces.

Consequently, the article addresses the critical issue of micro-exclusion as a barrier to delivering quality education for all learners in Zimbabwean rural primary schools. The study has the potential to generate valuable evidence and insights that can inform interventions aimed at reducing micro-exclusion, thereby supporting learners’ academic trajectories. Ultimately, the research contributes meaningfully to the broader discourses on micro-exclusion by presenting how such practices manifest and their effects within rural primary school classrooms.

Therefore, the study answers the following research questions:

• How do teachers micro-exclude learners during teaching and learning in rural primary schools in Zimbabwe?
• What mitigation measures can be implemented to minimize micro-exclusion in rural primary school classrooms?

2. Theoretical Underpinning

The study is grounded in Paulo Freire’s Critical Pedagogy, a radical educational theory that challenges traditional hierarchies in teaching and learning. Developed by Freire, a Brazilian scholar and philosopher, the theory seeks to liberate the oppressed by transforming education into a practice of freedom rather than domination. At its core are the interwoven concepts of conscientisation, dialogue, and praxis, a cyclical process of reflection, action, and transformation (Majola et al. 2025). Freire’s framework is particularly relevant in rural Zimbabwe primary schools, where learners often experience marginalisation and micro-exclusion that render them passive rather than active participants in the classroom (Lee and Johnstone 2024).

Critical pedagogy assumes that education is inherently political and that teaching must confront and dismantle social injustices. The paradigm is dedicated to empowering learners who have traditionally been marginalised (Johnson and Mughal 2024). It positions learners’ lived experiences as central to the learning process and insists that social justice and democratic values are inseparable from pedagogy (Johnson and Mughal 2024; Chaulane 2021). In this context, micro-exclusion, manifested through subtle acts, becomes a critical site of analysis. These micro-exclusions are not isolated incidents but symptomatic of deeper structural inequalities and power imbalances in the classroom (Chaulane 2021). In rural Zimbabwe, where marginalisation is both systemic and spatial, this framework enables a critical examination of how micro-exclusion manifests in teacher-learner interactions and curriculum delivery.

By applying a critical pedagogy lens, this study interrogates how micro-exclusion operates within learner-teacher relationships, classroom practices, and institutional norms in rural Zimbabwe primary schools. It reveals that learners’ struggles are not merely academic deficiencies but are shaped by their interactions with teachers and the broader socio-political context (Majola et al. 2025). Freire’s critical pedagogy empowers both teachers and learners to critically reflect on these dynamics and to engage in transformative action that challenges exclusionary practices.

Ultimately, this theoretical framework contributes to the proposed solution by offering a liberatory pathway toward inclusive education. It calls on teachers to cultivate dialogue, reflexivity, and critical awareness, thereby creating classroom environments where all learners, especially those in marginalised rural settings, can participate fully and equitably. As Dee and Gershenson (2017) affirm, critical pedagogy fosters inclusive climates that dismantle patterns of marginalisation and reimagine rural classrooms as spaces of dignity, participation, and hope for all learners. In doing so, it becomes not only a lens for understanding micro-exclusion but also a powerful engine for educational transformation in Zimbabwean rural primary schools.

3. Literature Review

Generally, the belief is that people with disabilities, whether physical, mental, or intellectual, have always been on the margins of education systems. However, this issue extends even to other learners, though at a micro-classroom level. While more than 300 participants from 92 governments and 25 international organizations met in Salamanca, Spain, from 7 to 10 June 1994, to advance the goal of Education for All by addressing the fundamental policy changes needed to promote inclusive education, specifically enabling schools to serve all children, especially those with special educational needs (UNESCO 1994; Woodcock et al. 2022; Nizic and Carlbacker 2023), the focus did not include micro-exclusion at the pedagogical level in rural primary schools, which is the concern of this study. While macro-level policies, such as those discussed at Salamanca, aim to create inclusive systems, micro-exclusion can undermine these efforts. In the Zimbabwean rural context, where cultural and resource constraints compound systemic challenges, micro-exclusion is not a trivial educational problem as it cannot be easily addressed through educational policies (Dee and Gershenson 2017).

3.1. Conceptualising Micro-Exclusion in Education

The concept of micro-exclusion originated in the 1970s, when psychologist Chester Pierce first introduced the idea of microaggressions (Toke 2022). Micro-exclusion, sometimes also referred to as differential nonverbal behaviours, differential academic interactions, and differential reactions under the same conditions, describes subtle, often unintended acts of discrimination or exclusion based on attributes such as race, gender, socioeconomic status, age, or disability (Inan-Kaya and Rubie-Davies 2022; Wiltgren 2023). Pierce identified everyday verbal or nonverbal expressions, such as snubs or insults, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages as forms of micro-exclusion (Toke 2022). These brief but impactful acts can be covert, making them difficult to detect and challenge, though some are overt (Harsma 2021). Because micro-exclusions often occur discreetly, they often go unnoticed by educational authorities, yet their repercussions can produce lasting adverse effects on learners’ educational opportunities (Webster 2022; Wiltgren 2023). As a result, disparities emerge in how learners are welcomed, cared for, valued, and provided equitable opportunities for learning and participation (Woodcock et al. 2022). Therefore, as a contested and evolving concept, micro-exclusion continues to be a subject of ongoing debate, with teachers continually exploring strategies to better serve the diverse needs of learners within primary classroom contexts (Webster 2022).

Furthermore, micro-exclusion is accurately described as informal, silent, or soft exclusion. It represents a complex, ongoing process whereby teachers enact subtle forms of marginalisation moment-by-moment with their learners (Benjamin et al. 2003; Van Der Merwe 2015). Another perspective further illustrates that micro-exclusion manifests when a learner is enrolled but segregated into a designated area in the classroom, only permitted to attend part of the day, present but not actively participating in activities with peers, or perceived as a burden rather than as a valued member of the learning community (Cologon 2015). In many primary classrooms, teachers tend to prioritise the needs of the majority of learners, frequently at the expense of learners with specific learning or behavioural needs (Pollard et al. 2005). Education is a fundamental human right that should promote inclusive and equitable environments, ensure the provision of quality teaching and learning for all (Zickafoose et al. 2024; Soerensen and Grumloese 2020). The aim is to recognise differences as an essential and enriching aspect of daily classroom life, rather than viewing them as a burden for teachers (Benjamin et al. 2003). According to Sue and Spanierman (2020), ignoring or dismissing micro-exclusions perpetuates systems of power and privilege, ultimately depriving certain learners of the personal growth and benefits that accrue from addressing educational inequities.

3.2. Case Studies

Global research has increasingly highlighted how micro-exclusion is widespread in educational settings, showing its harmful effects on students’ participation and overall classroom experiences (Toke 2022). Faustino et al. (2019) identified classroom behaviors such as barring, labeling, disqualifying, stigmatizing, and institutionalizing as key micro-exclusion tactics that suppress student involvement and concluded they negatively impact learner participation. Similarly, Nes (2017) pointed out that separating students and labeling them strengthens exclusion and hampers academic growth. Dukpa et al. (2024a, 2024b) observed gatekeeping practices in Australia, where students are subtly redirected to special classrooms within mainstream schools, thereby reinforcing marginalization. In Italy, Dovigo (2023) found that inequality and segregation are deeply rooted in school systems, with students from minority or disadvantaged backgrounds, especially those with disabilities, frequently experiencing micro-exclusion. Toke (2022) also emphasized that micro-exclusion appears in everyday interactions, such as interrupting or ignoring individual learners based on gender, race, culture, or age, and making assumptions about their abilities. Together, these studies highlight that micro-exclusion is a global, systemic issue that quietly undermines inclusive education by creating subtle yet powerful barriers to full student participation and fairness.

In Zimbabwe, research has been predominantly on inclusive education, highlighting both its potential and the challenges faced in its implementation. Chitiyo et al. (2024) revealed a paradox where teachers, though supportive of inclusive ideas, lack the self-efficacy and training necessary to translate these into practice. This gap in professional preparedness is compounded by findings from Mangena and Chidhakwa (2024), who exposed the disconnect between inclusive policies and practices, citing inadequate infrastructure, insufficient teacher development, and entrenched social prejudices as persistent obstacles. Dube et al. (2021) further explored the deep-rooted social misconceptions and fears surrounding disability, which continue to shape exclusionary attitudes within communities, thereby impeding access to equitable education. Sibanda (2018) broadened the lens, identifying a constellation of systemic impediments, ranging from policy ambiguity and resource scarcity to cultural stereotypes and lack of political will, that collectively stifle progress. Mutepfa et al. (2007) brought the lived experiences of students and their families into focus, highlighting parental concerns over safety and educational quality, especially in rural areas where disparities in infrastructure and resources are most pronounced. These studies paint a picture; despite legislative frameworks and growing awareness, inclusive education in Zimbabwe is hindered by a confluence of under-resourced systems, ill-prepared teachers, and pervasive social biases.

While existing scholarship has highlighted various dimensions of inclusive education in Zimbabwe, the nuanced phenomenon of micro-exclusion within rural primary school classrooms remains conspicuously underexplored. This empirical study addresses that critical gap by foregrounding the lived experiences of six rural primary school teachers, examining how both overt and covert micro-exclusionary practices subtly unfold in everyday classroom interactions. These practices are often normalised or overlooked, significantly hindering learner participation and academic growth. In a context where rural education is persistently marginalised, this research offers a vital contribution to the discourse by exposing the silent mechanisms of exclusion and generating actionable insights to inform targeted interventions that promote genuine inclusivity at the classroom level.

3.3. The Zimbabwean Rural Education Context

Education in rural Zimbabwe is a critical issue, marked by chronic underrepresentation, neglect, and systemic deprivation (Matarise 2024; Moyo 2022). Learners in these rural contexts grapple with intersecting social, economic, and health-related challenges that perpetuate educational inequalities (Mutale 2015; Moyo 2022). Despite the urgent need for transformation, rural primary schools continue to suffer from poor infrastructure, limited teacher development, and disparities in resources (Mandina 2012). These conditions not only compromise learning outcomes but also entrench marginalisation.

Compounding these issues, rural teachers often operate in isolation with minimal professional support and may unconsciously enact exclusionary practices shaped by learners’ demographics and entrenched biases (Doyle et al. 2024). As a result, micro-exclusion becomes both a symptom and a driver of educational inequality. Rural primary school teachers, therefore, stand at the crossroads, simultaneously implicated in the problem and essential to the solution (Wiltgren 2023). Addressing rural education challenges demands a collective, multisectoral approach that empowers teachers, transforms learning environments, and dismantles the subtle yet pervasive barriers that hinder inclusive, and quality education for all learners in Zimbabwe.

4. Statement of Problem

Despite the growing recognition of inclusive education practices in primary schools, micro-exclusion persists within rural classroom contexts, where subtle behaviours and systemic biases marginalise some learners from full participation in teaching and learning activities. The study sought to identify the factors contributing to micro-exclusion, examine teachers’ awareness and understanding of these practices, and evaluate the strategies that can be employed to mitigate their impact on learner engagement practices. In highlighting the nuances of micro-exclusion, the study provides insights that inform rural primary school teachers aimed at promoting truly inclusive educational environments at a micro-classroom level.

5. Materials and Methods

Adopting a phenomenological multiple case study and an interpretivist stance, the paper explored the perspectives of six different rural primary school teachers from three schools regarding micro-exclusion practices through direct empirical observations in their classrooms (Cannas et al. 2024). The framework was chosen as a research design to provide empirical insights and make a cross-check analysis of primary teachers’ micro-exclusion experiences of life in different classrooms, alongside the meaning attributed to it (Hunziker and Blankenagel 2021). It allowed us to understand the reflective processes that rural primary school teachers as professionals in their own personal and classroom spaces regarding micro-exclusion (Johnson and Mughal 2024). The approach was applicable to summarize, explain, and clarify the logic of this complex micro-exclusion phenomenon, and not to generalize findings.

The study appreciated that the relationship between the teacher and the learner in the classroom context is transactional. The case selection was focused on rural primary school classrooms and their naturalness (Jepsen et al. 2024). It used evidence from six different Grade 4 rural primary school classrooms in Masvingo rural district to examine the experiences of teachers in micro-exclusion. In addition, the selected teachers were from different rural primary school environments, which facilitated differential understanding of the nature of micro-exclusion. Before data collection, we contacted potential sample primary schools in advance, and we selected cases that were willing to provide us with a wealth of primary data. Thus, the six rural classrooms were conveniently chosen as research sites for the semi-structured interviews and non-participant classroom observations, based on accessibility and the teachers’ consent. The goal of using convenience sampling was to contextualize the findings on how rural primary school teachers described and understood micro-exclusion during curriculum implementation.

The first phase of the study involved mapping the three rural primary schools to identify primary school teachers and obtain consents and clearances, especially from the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education, Masvingo province. The teachers involved were qualified and not novices, with more than 15 years of teaching experience at the rural primary school level, and they were directly involved in or responsible for teaching their classes, as shown in

Table 1. Primary school teachers’ descriptive characteristics.

Primary School and Teachers	No of Learners	Qualifications	Years of Rural Primary Teaching
School 1
Teacher A	52	Bachelor of Education	18
Teacher B	60	Diploma of Education	23
School 2
Teacher C	47	Diploma in Education	21
Teacher D	42	Diploma in Education	19
School 3
Teacher E	48	Bachelor of Education, Master of Education	18
Teacher F	54	Bachelor of Education	27

. In order to gain an understanding of the micro-exclusion practices from the teachers who taught in various subject areas in their classrooms, we observed them during teaching and learning and interviewed them thereafter. The number of learners in the classroom was also recorded, as this was important to ascertain how the teachers balanced the interaction with learners, which was critical for equitable learner experiences.

5.1. The Development of the Observation Protocol

The observation protocol was developed to ensure a systematic and comprehensive data collection process aligned with the research questions. The process began with a literature review of existing observational frameworks, which informed the selection of key behaviours. Then, a preliminary schedule was developed with the view to balancing thoroughness with feasibility in the sampled primary school contexts. Key considerations included: selecting behaviors that directly related to the research questions, determining optimal observation periods to capture sufficient data, scheduling observations at different times to account for variability, and structuring the protocol to facilitate consistent data collection.

Once finalized, the protocol was implemented as follows: We familiarized ourselves with the instrument to ensure consistency, we used a checklist to record the observations systematically, and throughout data collection, we monitored adherence to the schedule and adjusted where necessary. To ensure fidelity to the protocol, we conducted periodic inter-observer reliability checks and addressed the discrepancies. The implementation process emphasised consistency and reliability, thereby strengthening the trustworthiness of the data collected.

Each researcher was assigned two classes to observe and spent five days in each class observing and examining the nature of the micro-exclusions, how they manifested, and how the teachers handled them. This prolonged engagement on site was critical as it allowed a deeper understanding of the phenomenon and enabled participants to act and think naturally (Dado et al. 2023). The prolonged interaction provided more in-depth data during observations and addressed questions of credibility.

5.2. Data Triangulation

We triangulated observation with semi-structured interview data to provide important knowledge critical to understanding the qualitative interactive micro-exclusion dynamics occurring in the classrooms. All interviews were audio-recorded and later transcribed verbatim by the third author, while observations were recorded manually by all authors as the micro-exclusion occurred in classrooms. An audit trail was conducted after semi-structured interview data collection to confirm the transcriptions. The participants made comments and adjustments, which added trustworthiness to the data.

The second phase was data coding. The data from the two instruments were systematically organised and categorised into a set of overarching themes, reflecting the main observation categories and those covered by the interview schedule (Webster 2022). Thematic analysis of observation data and semi-structured interviews was conducted using Braun and Clarke’s (2022) six-stage framework to gain deeper insights into the teachers’ actual experiences of micro-exclusion in classrooms. The research aim was not to make generalisations, but to go in-depth and discover the experiences of primary school teachers that contributed to our growing understanding of micro-exclusion in rural primary schools (Johnson and Mughal 2024).

6. Results

The study examines how micro-exclusion practices are constructed and experienced in the everyday life of learners in the classrooms as teachers generate knowledge, awareness, and mitigation measures. We investigated the research questions through reports from observation, which detailed the occurrence of each micro-exclusion episode and were supplemented by teacher semi-structured interview data. Our study, as observed, found widespread evidence of systemic micro-exclusion in rural primary schools in Zimbabwe. As we observed teachers and their learners in the classroom throughout each day, some micro-exclusion tendencies started to emerge on Day 3, with most of the teachers, as during the first two days, being conscious of our presence. It is crucial to emphasise that our focus was not on frequencies, but rather on the prevalence and manifestation of micro-exclusion practices.

The data presented in

Table 2. Summary of findings on observed micro-exclusion behaviours.

Teacher Context	Micro-Exclusion Behavior
A. Lack of assistance/looking down on religious and cultural grounds	Either ignored, asked to put hand down, no time for questions, no assistance, read on your own, comments that downplay other religions and cultures, inappropriate comments
B. Labelling/name-calling/stereotyping	Labelling-stupid and dull answer/question, devaluing learner contribution, culture of mistrust for some learners, lack of support for some learners, open favoritism for some learners, using inappropriate humor, hostile reactions, using sexist language
C. Differentiated group activities	Some learners get more work while others get less work, some are given homework and others are not, a lack of trust in some learners, showing an inequitable power structure in the classroom, a lack of support for some learners, and setting low expectations for some learners
D. Segregated appreciation	Appreciating responses from other learners by whole class clapping while others are not receiving the same recognition for the same effort, devaluing responses, no expression of appreciation and validation of some learner contributions, a culture of classroom care for some in the classroom at the expense of others
E. Time allocation	Learners with reading difficulties and spoken language challenges are not given time to participate in activities-only eloquent learners are given the chance.
F. Neatness/smartness/status	Some learners are often given responsibilities/duties as group leaders on account of their smartness and economic status, no time for learners from low economic status, who wear shabby uniforms/dressing, and negative comments on attire.

from the observation revealed that there were no uniform experiences of learners; instead, each learner’s classroom experiences were uniquely shaped by their relationship with their teachers. Teachers tended to be informal, inconsistent, unpredictable, and spontaneous in their interaction with learners, often engaging in micro-exclusion that subtly marginalised certain learners. These experiences were embedded within and influenced by specific classroom contexts in which interactions occurred, resulting in variability from one learner to another.

Among the six rural primary school teachers observed, it was evident that micro-exclusion creates two distinct classroom learning environments, with some concerning impacts on learners’ academic development through communicative exchange with teachers. Furthermore, it was observed that no learner was immune to micro-exclusion; all were potential ‘victims’ regardless of their academic pace, whether fast, average, slow, male, or female, although certain individual learners experienced this phenomenon more frequently than others.

Findings from Interviews

The section examines the themes that emerged through the thematic analysis. Each theme drawn from the teachers’ lived realities illustrates how micro-exclusion manifests in the teaching-learning context and how it reflects the broader patterns of micro-exclusion in rural primary schools. This culminated in the following themes that were relatable to rural primary school contexts: teachers’ conceptualisation of micro-exclusion, awareness of micro-exclusion practices, managing teacher efficacy in micro-exclusion, and in-service teacher development.

Rural teachers’ conceptualisation of micro-exclusion

Rural primary school teachers showed a fragmented conceptualisation of micro-exclusion. Some viewed it as not different from exclusion.

It’s just the same as exclusion with special needs ….. learners with learning disabilities are not treated fairly

(Teacher C)

….when learners have learning needs, they should be excluded from the rest for special treatment and assistance…

(Teacher F)

Others showed some good understanding of micro-exclusion and its application in teaching and learning contexts.

….some unintentional teacher behaviours that exclude the learner from participating in an aspect at a particular moment in time…

(Teacher D)

….comments and behaviours that we teachers use either intentionally or unintentionally but have the effect of excluding a learner from active participation….does not happen all the time.

(Teacher E)

As one teacher stated:

... micro-exclusions are small episodes where the teacher in the classroom does not respect learner contribution, demean a learner, or is hostile at times without noticing… but has a profound negative impact on the learner’s self-esteem and confidence as the learner feels excluded

(Teacher A)

Teacher awareness of micro-exclusion practices

Most teachers were oblivious that their acts and behaviours constituted micro-exclusion. One teacher participant said:

Some of the issues that you call micro-exclusion are not at all given the size of the classes we manage….it’s part of learner management strategies….imagine having 60 learners in the class… you have to micro-manage them

(Teacher B)

Another teacher laughed:

If ignoring a learner, using some humor or validating a response, or selecting fast readers to read constitute micro-exclusion, then we are culpable every day….given such large classes, that is expected….you cannot treat all these learners the same every day

(Teacher D)

Micro-exclusion appears to be one aspect that has not been taken seriously by some rural primary school teachers. These teachers quipped:

Some of the issues you call micro-exclusion are not at all…. it’s exclusion taken too far

(Teacher A & F)

…..so everything is micro-exclusion…

(Teacher A & C)

I know my learners very well and will treat them the way I think is in their best interest…. whether it means micro-exclusion or not

(Teacher E)

You don’t know these rural learners well….they deserve this treatment, or else you won’t achieve much with them..

(Teacher A, C & E)

Micro-management of micro-exclusion

Rural primary school teachers agreed that, by its very nature, it is very difficult to manage micro-exclusion during teaching and learning.

Our classes are big to imagine, with over 40 learners…..micro-exclusion is very difficult to manage …it’s not planned and happens spontaneously, and you may not realise it or even fail to know it as a teacher, given the numbers that we deal with in our large classes.

(Teacher D, E, F)

It can only be managed when you are very conscious and cautious of what you say and do to learners…otherwise you may not notice.

(Teacher A, C, E)

… very difficult to manage …at times, the reaction of other learners may be the indicator that I have micro-excluded a particular learner.

(Teacher E, F)

At times, we care less about our actions and what we say to learners …and we do not even think of how best we can assist all learners in their time of need.

(Teacher D)

In-service teacher development

Rural primary school teachers felt the need for staff development and in-service training if learners’ discomforts as a result of micro-exclusion are to be ameliorated and to create learner-friendly classrooms.

The need for in-service professional development on this critical aspect of micro-exclusion cannot be overstated.

(A, F)

Our level of knowledge of micro-exclusion is very low…what we know about is inclusive education…we need more education on micro-exclusion.

(B)

We can have institutional staff development workshops on micro-exclusion so that we can operate on the same page… there are so many violations of learners’ rights that take place in the classroom, which we need to understand and make amends

(C)

Without staff development, micro-exclusion will persist

(Teacher A, D, E, F)

... conscientisation is needed through in-service training on this phenomenon, and this will go a long way in helping learners overcome challenges as a result of micro-exclusion and create user-friendly and welcoming classroom environments for all learners

(Teacher B, C)

In summary, the thematic interviews with rural primary school teachers revealed how the teachers conceptualised, practiced, and mitigated micro-exclusion in classroom settings. Broad micro-exclusion practices, which were either intentional or unintended, led to teachers leaving learners without adequate individual support and with damaged self-esteem during their time of need. Rural primary school teachers focused more on achieving results and conformity to teacher classroom expectations.

7. Discussion

The study explored micro-exclusion practices in rural primary schools through classroom observations and teachers’ self-reported practices through semi-structured interviews. In explaining micro-exclusion in the classroom, some teachers generally demonstrated lack of understanding of the concept, its manifestation, and management while others possessed a more nuanced grasp of the phenomenon.

Overall, as learners struggled to be heard, understood, and attract the teacher’s attention, these moments often gave rise to the most frequent instances of academic micro-exclusion for some learners. Micro-exclusion was not solely conveyed through words; it also manifested through the teacher’s actions and impacted all learners. This finding aligns with observations by Woodcock et al. (2022), who noted that all learners, regardless of ability, disability, ethnicity, socio-economic status, nationality, language, gender, sexual orientation, or faith, were susceptible to micro-exclusion at some point, with significant implications for their access to and full participation in learning. Furthermore, Toke (2022) emphasizes the importance of teachers providing fair and equitable learning experiences that are free from discrimination, regardless of learners’ differences. This can be achieved by building caring and respectful relationships and cultivating classroom cultures where diversity is acknowledged, valued, and celebrated, as outlined in the tenets of critical pedagogy. Recognising that all learners have accessibility needs, there is an urgent need for more inclusive approaches to prevent micro-exclusions. Teachers, at times, act as both protectors and perpetrators of micro-exclusion within the classroom, with some of their actions being unjustified or disproportionate.

The micro-exclusion practiced by the rural primary school teachers was multifaceted, interwoven, and non-cumulative. Specific micro-exclusion practices included differentiated group activities, homework, grading, screening, grouping, and labelling or name-calling, using differentiated instruction, delegation of duties, and distinctions based on appearance, such as describing some learners as neat or smart, while labelling others as scruffy. These also involved ignoring learners who were disrespectful to the teacher, providing fewer opportunities to learners who were less eloquent in reading and spoken language, especially English, and favouritism, favouring certain learners through more frequent interactions at the expense of others. Additionally, classroom sitting arrangements that advantaged some learners over others contributed to micro-exclusion (Webster 2022). It appeared in the rural classroom context, some reasons that contributed to micro-exclusion included poverty, low attainment, gender, and being from a particular ethnic background. Thus, micro-exclusion affected all learners, and the excluded learners missed out on mainstream education.

Woodcock et al. (2022) emphasize the need for differentiated instruction by adapting the learning environment, instruction, content, the processes through which students engage and learn, and the products through which they communicate their understanding. Rural primary school teachers must create an equitable, supportive academic environment for all learners, which can help address the learning challenges faced by rural learners caused by micro-exclusion (Guldberg et al. 2021).

Additionally, findings indicated that some teachers generally understood micro-exclusion, although their understanding varied. Micro-exclusion mainly happens because of teachers’ limited knowledge and attitudes. Many rural primary school teachers micro-exclude learners due to the complex social communication and interaction needs of diverse students, which require the teacher’s attention at the same time (Dukpa et al. 2024a, 2024b). Some teachers held preconceived and biased ideas about certain learners, affecting those learners’ participation. Micro-exclusion is seen as a subtle and widespread issue within current primary classroom settings, sometimes expressed openly, and it has become difficult for individual teachers to manage. Often, there was a lack of awareness, a need for further professional development, and a limited understanding among primary school teachers about how micro-exclusions impact learners.

Rural primary school teachers need to see every learner as an individual and be flexible to create inclusion for all learners in practice. In Zimbabwean primary schools, learners typically spend the entire day in the same class with the same teacher, who teaches up to 60 learners across all curriculum subjects (Mufanechiya 2015). Additionally, teachers combine their teaching roles with coordinating sporting activities. The increased workload and learner diversity present many challenges to the idea of participation for all learners, especially regarding the ‘uniqueness’ of each learner. Sometimes, even some learners’ existence was not acknowledged or recognized in the classroom, given the teachers’ workload. These large class sizes worsen micro-exclusion practices, making it difficult for teachers to achieve equity and social justice in the classroom. Teacher workload in Zimbabwean rural primary schools is generally recognized as excessive. As a result, rural primary school teachers often see individual differences and diversity as problematic, given the large number of learners they serve. Effective support for learners’ needs in the classroom is crucial in reducing micro-exclusion.

Teachers are students’ first point of contact in the classroom, and the relationships they form shape how students develop in the teaching and learning environment. The learning setting should prioritize building positive teacher–learner relationships, as these connections have a profound impact on learners’ academic success, behavior, and participation (Liberante 2012). Classroom experiences resulting from strong teacher-learner relationships emphasize the importance of equitable academic spaces for learner growth. Rural primary school teachers often do not implement individualized teaching strategies or inclusive measures. Creating a positive teaching environment free of micro-exclusion should focus on each student and their potential for development. Teachers need to recognize the importance of adopting teaching styles that accommodate all learners, supporting everyone and promoting an inclusive, rather than specialized, approach. This involves developing a rapport between teachers and learners necessary to deliver high-quality education that addresses the diverse needs of all students, as suggested by critical pedagogy. Some issues of micro-exclusion arise from strained relationships between teachers and students. Interestingly, while teachers oppose micro-exclusion in principle, their implicit biases frequently enact micro-exclusion in practice.

The study also raises the important issue of power dynamics between students and teachers, where micro-exclusion takes place. Sometimes teachers, knowingly or unknowingly, contribute to this through their comments, opinions, or behaviors. Micro-exclusion often results from a series of small missteps, disruptive actions, challenging the teacher’s authority, and negative attitudes toward certain students. From a relational perspective, all students should be viewed in light of their circumstances and the support they receive from teachers. It is easy to overlook how class size can influence the types of interactions, relationships, and overall teaching and learning experiences for both teachers and students. Each student has unique strengths, weaknesses, and needs, and teachers must recognize and support this diversity. Most importantly, teachers need to ensure that these supports are integrated into the teaching process by creating a child-friendly classroom environment for all students.

Interestingly, micro-exclusion is not always permanent, consistent, or ongoing; instead, it often occurs in short episodes of interaction that still negatively affect learners. Micro-exclusion and inequality have become part of the daily reality for some students in rural primary schools in Zimbabwe. Exclusion from meaningful classroom activities is quite common, with variations in frequency and visibility. As a less obvious and informal form of exclusion, micro-exclusion has become a barrier to providing quality, equitable education. Addressing this issue is essential to ensure all students experience fair and participatory learning environments. Learning spaces should become welcoming, accessible, and safe for everyone, aligning with critical pedagogy principles. Although most research on educational exclusion focuses on formal exclusion (Power and Taylor 2024), primary school students still face inequalities and segregation within classrooms. Not every student has an equal chance to participate in all activities that support teaching and learning goals, which impacts the quality of education they receive.

The study found that teachers can unintentionally create social dynamics in education that cause segregation, affect equality, and fail to close performance gaps among students. Fairness in the classroom is essential for all students’ success. Many forms of micro-exclusion go unnoticed because they are subtle (Liberante 2012). Classroom micro-exclusion leads to lost learning time and has serious effects on students’ future academic progress. It can produce long-lasting impacts, leaving learners silent and unheard. Teachers in rural primary schools in Zimbabwe often held neutral or negative views about micro-exclusion in classrooms.

8. Implications

Concerns about participation among rural learners have increased as many schools adopt inclusive education on a large scale, yet micro-exclusion persists. During teaching and learning, especially for some learners, micro-exclusion results in significant loss of learning time and missed opportunities. As a subtle form of discrimination, it deeply affects individuals or groups of learners, even though it is less obvious than overt prejudice. When teachers do not treat all learners equally, learners experience conditional engagement or micro-exclusion episodes, which unintentionally undermine their sense of belonging and self-worth. Rural teachers believe that micro-excluding learners was a way of including them and promoting participation. Micro-excluded learners are expected to constantly adapt to the teaching environment, while teachers make fewer efforts to modify their teaching to ensure all children can fully participate in daily activities (Dovigo 2023). Teachers tend to focus on whole-class instruction, and their attention to inclusion, differentiation, and learners’ individual needs often fades. This leads to micro-exclusion processes, where learners who do not meet implicit expectations of classroom performance are overlooked and excluded. These practices, rooted in traditional educational methods, prevent many students from accessing quality education due to gaps in provision and teachers’ resistance to meeting diverse needs (Soerensen and Grumloese 2020). As a result, full participation is often limited and mostly available to learners whose teachers find it easier to teach. However, full participation is a core element of inclusive education (Arishi 2024). It appears that rural primary school teachers lack the knowledge and capacity to effectively address the needs of an increasingly diverse student body. Ultimately, some learners experiencing micro-exclusion face what Webster (2022, p. 16) describes as “an impoverished curriculum, pedagogy, and attention.” These learners encounter episodes of inequality and unfair treatment stemming from their interactions with teachers. Such experiences can be both temporary and enduring (Varsik and Gorochovskij 2023), often leaving lasting negative impressions. Learners should feel that they belong within their educational community or classroom (Qvortrup and Qvortrup 2018). Each teacher handles micro-exclusion issues differently, highlighting the varied approaches used to address this challenge.

9. Conclusions

Despite being confined to six classrooms, the study makes a substantive contribution to the discourse on micro-exclusion within curriculum implementation, revealing its detrimental impact on affected learners by eroding their participation and academic development. It damages their confidence and self-image by reinforcing disadvantages. The problem seems difficult, with some teachers unaware that their actions amount to micro-exclusion. Teachers should treat all learners with pride and respect and ensure they feel valued, accepted, and welcomed in classrooms to promote academic justice. With this understanding, Zimbabwean rural primary school teachers can become more aware of the potential, unintended or unpredictable effects of micro-exclusion on learners’ academic growth. If not managed properly, micro-exclusion could significantly impact the future educational development of rural primary school learners in Zimbabwe.

10. Recommendations

Rural primary school teachers must critically reflect on their role and responsibilities and the extent to which their practices may inadvertently perpetuate epistemic micro-marginalisation of learners within the teaching-learning contexts.

Informing rural primary school teachers through workshops, teacher support, and staff development may not be enough. Still, they must be supported by policy frameworks and practical strategies that address the complex issue of micro-exclusion and the educational implications of a lack of policies to deal with this phenomenon at the classroom level.