Next Article in Journal
Disability-Related Risks Among Women and Girls Who Are Forcibly Displaced from Venezuela
Previous Article in Journal
Using Qualitative Geospatial Methods to Explore Physical Activity in Children with Developmental Disabilities: A Feasibility Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Disabilities
Volume 4
Issue 4
10.3390/disabilities4040054
disabilities-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Qualitative Study to Identify the Training and Resource Needs of Secondary School Teachers in Responding to Students with SEN and SENS

by
María del Carmen Rodríguez-Jiménez
1,*,
Irene Puerta-Araña
2 and
Miriam Catalina González-Afonso
1
1
Department of Didactics and Educational Research, Faculty of Education, University of La Laguna, 38204 San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Spain
2
Independent Researcher, 38205 San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Disabilities 2024, 4(4), 872-892; https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities4040054
Submission received: 25 May 2024 / Revised: 12 September 2024 / Accepted: 10 October 2024 / Published: 24 October 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to provide an analysis of secondary school teacher training in order to identify existing needs and the resources currently available to respond to SENS and SEN students. A qualitative and descriptive research method was used. Semi-structured interviews were carried out to gather information. The sample consisted of 45 teachers who were distributed throughout the autonomous community of the Canary Islands (Spain). The analysis was carried out using the qualitative data analysis programme MAXQDA, version 20. The main findings show that teachers, in general, do not feel prepared to deal with students with SEN and SENS and, therefore, ask for experts to support them in this task and for training in emotional education in order to acquire the competencies and skills for classroom management.

1. Introduction

By the year 2030, most countries should have implemented a range of policies to ensure inclusive, equitable, quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all, as set out by Sustainable Development Goal 4 [1]. UNESCO has established policies to guarantee educational inclusion and reduce situations of marginalisation and exclusion of students [2,3,4].
According to UNESCO [5], teacher training is the basis for the acquisition of an inclusive culture, which favours the integral development and well-being of every student from a qualitative and equitable perspective. In addition, in order to achieve inclusion in the classroom, public administrations need to provide educational centres which contain adapted resources for two specific groups of students: those with Specific Needs for Educational Support (SENS), who require support and specific educational attention at some point during their time at school, through adaptations to the curriculum; and those with Special Educational Needs (SEN), who require support and specific educational attention because of a disability [6,7].
Spain is among the European countries with the highest number of measures aimed at promoting student inclusion in educational centres, according to studies carried out by the European Commission. In fact, inclusive education is enshrined as a right held by all students in the amendment of the Organic Law on Education (LOMLOE) [8,9,10].
In Spain, pre-service and in-service teacher training has experienced little change since the 19th century, even though the demands and the professional context have evolved since then [11,12]. Educational transformation begins with teacher training, which is the means to facilitate the teaching–learning process, and training ought to include the acquisition of emotional competence in order to transmit knowledge [13].
The training model in Spain is divided into initial training (before entering the teaching profession) and in-service training (during professional development) [14]. In the case of secondary teachers, who are responsible for the education of pupils aged from 12 to 18, initial training consists of a one-year master’s degree called Máster de Formación del Profesorado de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria y Bachillerato, Formación Profesional y Enseñanza de Idiomas (Master’s Degree in Teacher Training for Compulsory Secondary Education and Baccalaureate, Vocational Training and Language Teaching). This degree is regulated by Order EDU/3498/2011 of 16 December, modifying Order ECI/3858/2007 of 27 December, and includes pedagogical, didactic and research training, as well as 175 h of work experience in educational centres [15,16].
The in-service training is carried out throughout the professional career of each teacher and is a set of training activities aimed at improving their scientific, technical, didactic and professional preparation. It is regulated by the Ministry of Education and the Autonomous Communities. In the case of the Autonomous Community of the Canary Islands, in-service training is provided by Educational Centres, which must draw up a training plan for teachers each academic year based on their training needs.
Teacher Training Centres (PTCs) provide training courses and act as resource centres and meeting places for teachers.
The Ministry of Education of the Canary Islands has a Teacher Training and Development Service, which offers in-service training courses to improve teachers’ professional skills.
For Nieto and Alfageme-González [17], in-service training can be divided into individual technical training (lectures, conferences, workshops, telematic training, etc.) and collegial professional development (coaching, peer observation, shared teaching, school visits, working groups, collaborative action research, professional communities, professional networks, etc.).
In general terms, the competencies that teachers should have are pedagogical, digital, emotional and research competencies. In order to train teachers for inclusion, this content is included in both initial and in-service training, both in theory and in practice.
In this article, we focus on identifying the needs of in-service teachers in order to develop inclusive teaching.
Arias-Pastor et al. [18] and Arvelo-Rosales et al. [19] take into account a series of conditions that must be met in order to adequately respond to student diversity, among which the following are worthy of note: (a) knowledge and procedures both in the field of specialisation and the specific attention required for students in general and SEN students in particular; (b) a positive and collaborative attitude towards responding to diversity; (c) appropriate resources to adequately respond to student diversity; and (d) promotion of collaborative work with families.
One of the changes that should be addressed by educational administrations when designing training is to ensure that professionals are equipped with the necessary skills and competencies to meet the needs of SENS and SEN students, which is one of the fundamental axes of inclusive education, without neglecting the generation of positive attitudes towards them [20].
The studies by Arias-Pastor et al. [18] show that teachers have positive attitudes towards diversity but lack training and feel insecure when dealing with SENS and SEN students. Teachers’ concerns include the low impact of training received on inclusion; training gaps in knowledge on diversity; barriers to learning; low digital literacy; and the need to develop emotional skills for the evolution of teaching–learning processes [21,22,23] and overcome the barrier between special education and inclusive education [24].
Furthermore, it is essential that teachers receive emotional education training to better understand their own emotions, identify the emotions of others and develop their ability to generate positive emotions, etc. By mastering this knowledge, teachers acquire the necessary competencies to address the social and cognitive dimensions of learners and thus ensure their inclusion [25]. This calls for the acceptance of others, the elimination of prejudices, a change in perceptions and expectations towards SENS and SEN students, and an educational response that addresses the individual needs of each student.
Bisquerra and López-Cassá [26] define emotional education as a continuous and permanent educational process that seeks to strengthen the development of emotional competencies as an essential component of personal growth, with the aim of preparing people for life and contributing to their personal and social well-being. Emotional education is rarely included in teacher training programmes, which means that most teachers do not have a solid foundation in this area, which is nevertheless crucial for their professional development.
Numerous studies [27,28,29] conclude that ongoing teacher training should include emotional and social development, as well as instruction on how to promote these topics in the school curriculum. This would create a positive impact on the teaching–learning process.
It is also necessary to integrate the use of ICT adapted to SENS and SEN students into teacher training, as these tools facilitate educational and social inclusion. According to Méndez et al. [30], ICT adds value to the training process as it generates new methodologies and resources adapted to these students. Teachers need continuous professional development training in ICT in order to integrate these tools more effectively in the classroom [31,32,33].
This training should not be relegated to technical aspects but also include pedagogical instruction according to the characteristics of the students [34]. In particular, the use of ICT with SENS and SEN students can promote meaningful learning adapted to students’ personal characteristics, which contributes to quality education [35,36,37]. Various studies conclude that teachers lack training in the use of ICT adapted for students with disabilities [38,39,40], and it is clear that there is a lack of knowledge about the different educational tools and digital resources on offer [41,42].
In this context, it is crucial that teachers become aware of issues related to inclusion and learn about new techniques and methodologies aimed at students with SENS and SEN.
Several studies analyse the impact of material and personal resources and their availability and use in schools for the educational inclusion of students with SENS and SEN [43,44,45]. Most schools have adapted materials (adapted mice, raised tables and visual agendas, etc.) and technological tools that are used only occasionally. This practice can hinder access to learning for students with SENS and SEN [46,47].
In the Autonomous Community of the Canary Islands, respect for diversity is regulated by Law 6/25 July 2014, on Education and Decree 25/26 February 2018, which develops the principles of respect for diversity. The education legislation of the Canary Islands states that the education system must be inclusive, with the aim of ensuring that all pupils receive the attention they need to reach the maximum level of their competencies and abilities.
The principles of attention to diversity are prevention, inclusion, normalisation, overcoming inequalities, globality, coordination, promoting the opening of the centre to the environment and the use of the community’s social resource networks (Law 6/2014, art. 41.5).
The pedagogical response of the teaching staff should focus on identifying and eliminating barriers to learning, encouraging the participation of all students and planning proposals for improvement related to the school’s culture, practices and educational policies (Decree 25/2018, art. 4.1).
Among the measures to accommodate the diversity of students provided for in Decree 25/2018, art. 4.4 establishes exceptional measures that may include mixed schooling formulas for pupils with SEN, such as schooling in ordinary centres with preferential educational attention or in enclave classrooms [48,49].
In this region, education policies are implemented to ensure quality education for all students, taking into account the specificities of the islands and local socio-economic characteristics.
This study analyses the needs that secondary school teachers express in relation to training, human resources and materials necessary for the integration of SENS and SEN students, as well as the actions suggested in the Canary Islands Training Plan for 2024-27, with the aim of giving relevant information to improve training program implementation and promote inclusive educational practices.
This work forms part of a research project whose aim is to analyse secondary school teacher training in the autonomous community of the Canary Islands (Spain) in order to identify the training needs and the human and material resources currently available to respond to SENS and SEN students. This research aims to improve future secondary school teacher training and identify the resources necessary to teach with an inclusive approach.

2. Materials and Methods

This research is qualitative and uses multiple sources of data. This methodology was selected because, as Creswell and Poth [50] point out, in semi-structured interviews, participants share their ideas freely. Researchers then reviewed and analysed all the data and organised it into codes and dimensions that cut across data sources.

2.1. Participants

The sample in this qualitative research was obtained through non-probabilistic purposive sampling. The sample consisted of 45 secondary school teachers. A total of 40% (n = 18) were male and 60% (n = 27) were female teachers in the autonomous community of the Canary Islands (Spain). A total of 53.3% (n = 24) worked in the province of Santa Cruz de Tenerife and 46.67% (n = 21) in the province of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Figure 1 and Figure 2 show the age and years of experience of the teachers. The sample is characterised by the fact that 42.22% (n = 19) of the teachers are over 40 years old, and 48.49% (n = 22) have more than 16 years of teaching experience.

2.2. Instrument

This study used a qualitative, exploratory and descriptive approach, followed by a content analysis with category development [51], in order to identify the training needs of secondary school teachers and the resources currently at their disposal for dealing with SENS and SEN students. Semi-structured interviews were selected as a data collection technique, given their ability to provide contextualised and individualised data [52]. A script was established that allowed for a general structuring of the dimensions of the information collection process (training, personal resources and material resources) [52]. The formulation of these dimensions changed depending on the responses of the teachers who were being interviewed (Table 1).

2.3. Procedure

The data collection procedure was carried out by three researchers. It consisted of two one-hour sessions to agree on criteria and how to reformulate the questions in the event that participants did not understand them, with some examples given and advice on how to phrase questions in order to avoid short answers. This guaranteed the reliability of the results. The semi-structured teacher interviews were conducted over a period of two months, during which regular meetings were held to discuss the different issues that arose during data collection, to resolve disagreements, and to ensure consistency throughout the process. Each interview lasted approximately 30 min and was recorded for later transcription.

2.4. Data Analysis

MAXQDA 2020 (VERBI GmbH, Berlin, Germany) was used for the content analysis of the interviews. This programme allows for the efficient management of statistics, a methodical exploration of the topic, and a systematic analysis of the relationships between concepts. We started by identifying a system of categories which included topics that came out of the semi-structured interviews.
First, two teams of two researchers worked independently to create the categories. This work was carried out over a period of one month. The categories were agreed upon by each research pair, and those that were identified by both teams were selected. Finally, they were coded to ensure the quality of the data to be analysed [51].
This category system was applied to the content analysis of all data using MAXQDA. Interviews were transcribed into text files, and responses were coded by assigning codes to the document segments. Similar units of meaning were coded using the same label and colour. Codes were compared, looking for similarities and differences and were classified into subcodes. Table 2 presents the training dimension, categories, subcategories, description and codes. Table 3 presents the dimensions, material and personal resources, categories, descriptions and codes. Finally, a graphical representation model of code co-occurrence was selected to show the intersections or concurrences of the selected codes with other codes.

2.5. Ethical Consideration

Permission to conduct interviews was obtained on 21 April 2021 following the reception of the code of ethics (CEIBA 2021-0462). The ethical considerations of this study included confidentiality of the data and gathering the participants’ informed consent for the interviews and their recording, as well as their agreement to maintain anonymity, confidentiality and their right to withdraw from the research at any time.

3. Results

The results are presented according to the analysed dimensions: training, personal resources and material resources.

3.1. Training

The training dimension is made up of nine categories (theoretical foundations; curricular material adaptations; intervention strategies; inclusive practices; awareness training for students with SENS and SEN; collaboration; emotional education; family; technology and resources). As illustrated in Figure 3, the 137 comments gathered under the training dimension were coded, resulting in 153 entries. This accounts for the fact that some comments lent themselves to multiple coding.

3.1.1. Emotional Education

This category is made up of three subcategories (Figure 4). Of the 57 units of meaning, 42 refer to the need for training on strategies to manage emotions and resolve student conflict. This would involve acquiring emotional conscience, communicative skills, developing emotional intelligence and conflict resolution skills. Ten of the units of meaning refer to the need for training on student emotions and social skills development, particularly in relation to fostering collaboration, teamwork, empathy, modelling positive social behaviour in the classroom, etc. Five of the units of meaning have to do with the need to create an emotionally safe and helpful environment in classrooms with SENS and SEN students. Figure 5 shows five statements provided by teachers which are related to each subcode. These fragments were selected following affirmations from teachers in this category. This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews.

3.1.2. Technology and Resources

This category consists of two subcategories (Figure 6). Of the 21 units of meaning, 16 refer to the need for teacher training in new technologies, as they have become very important in the classroom, especially for improving responses to SEN students. This is reflected in two of the excerpts from the interviews.
This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“…It is important to acquire more training in ICT in order to deal with these new situations…”
PROF-33.
“…It is necessary to continue being trained in the use of ICT adapted to students with functional diversity…”
PROF-15.
To a lesser extent, training in specific resources was requested, depending on the type of SENS or SEN presented by the students.
“…Teaching staff request more training in specific resources for SEN and SENS students from public administration, as what they have at present is insufficient…”
PROF-15.
“…Teachers ask the educational administrations for more training in specific resources for students with SEN and SEN, as the training they have is insufficient...”
PROF-13.
“…Training in alternative communication systems to facilitate access to curricular content for SENS and SEN students...”
PROF-42.

3.1.3. Family

This category is divided into three subcategories (Figure 7). Of the 17 units of meaning, 12 indicate the need to involve and collaborate with the families of SENS and SEN students since, according to their statements, families are a crucial element in children’s education. For this reason, collaboration between the professionals of the educational centre and the parents is essential in order to facilitate the intervention process, as well as to attend to their specific needs.
This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“…Teacher training on strategies for conducting interviews with families, fostering empathy, closeness, enabling relationships of mutual help with families...”
PROF-41.
“…Provide training on how to collaborate effectively with families and faculty…”
PROF-22.
“…Training on the mastery of skills for affective and effective communication, which will help us to improve communication between teachers, students and family as another pillar that contributes to the emotional wellbeing of the educational community…”
PROF-9.
Finally, four units of meaning display the importance of family in the educational process to be addressed in the training. This highlights that, in order to achieve educational goals, the involvement of parents is needed so that there is coherence between what is worked on in the classroom and at home (Figure 7).
“…The family plays a fundamental role in the learning process of children, and they are a source of support for professionals in educational centres. Without their help we cannot achieve our objective…”
PROF-17.
“…In training it is important to include the role that the family plays and their contributions to the school…”
PROF-36.

3.1.4. Collaboration

This category is divided into three subcategories (Figure 8). Of the 16 units of meaning, 11 affirm that it is necessary to be trained in networking in order to facilitate coordination with the rest of the professionals in the centre. There is even a comment which affirms that networking itself is a training strategy and a key element in the teaching–learning process (it favours interaction between teachers, greater communication, increases flexibility, etc.). To a lesser extent, three units of meaning show training to acquire the required strategies for coordination with external support services, including the necessary steps within the educational administration to work together. The last two units of meaning added that it is fundamental to acquire skills to collaborate with other professionals, as it allows interaction development and reflection with other professionals of the education community.
This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“…sharing work with teachers from a collaborative vision to work in a systematic way…”
PROF-2.
“…training in cooperative and collaborative work in a school environment, brings benefits for both students and teachers in promoting diversity and inclusion, improving communication skills…”
PROF-9.

3.1.5. Theoretical Foundations

This category is divided into four subcategories (Figure 9). Seven of the 16 units of meaning state that it is necessary to have theoretical training in SENS and SEN to know how to act in the teaching–learning process and to promote individualised attention for these students in the classroom. Five statements highlight that, apart from having knowledge, it is necessary to know the evolutionary development and characteristics of these students in order to understand their behavioural changes and their needs during the school year. The remaining four units of meaning refer to models and approaches to inclusive education. None mention training in the legal and regulatory framework on attention to diversity, as the subjects considered that those aspects do not condition their work as teachers.
This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“…we have to be aware of the need for in depth knowledge concerning the characteristics of these students, to be able to give an appropriate response in the educational context. If we do not have in-depth training, we will not be able to achieve our objectives as teachers and we will treat a student without SENS like a SEN student…”
PROF-11.
“… I don’t need training in the legal framework. To assist my SEN students, I just need to have knowledge about their disability and their evolutionary development…”
PROF-1.
“…Courses on strategies to deal with the different situations that students with diversity may encounter at school and in the classroom…”
PROF-20.
“…Clear and precise knowledge of each SEN, as well as intervention guidelines for each of the following: Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), intellectual disabilities, visual impairment, hearing impairment, motor impairment, communication and language difficulties…”
PROF-35.
“Training in theoretical aspects of diversity and raising awareness of this issue...”
PROF-26.

3.1.6. Intervention Strategies

This category is divided into two subcategories (Figure 10). Of the 15 units of meaning, 14 indicate that teachers believe it is necessary to be trained in teaching–learning intervention strategies for SENS and SEN students. Only one unit of meaning refers to strategies to promote student participation and autonomy. That is why the subjects requested to be trained in means and procedural techniques to adapt the process of teaching–learning to the needs of the students in order to respond to situations concerning diversity in the classroom with appropriate strategies. Only one unit of meaning refers to fostering active involvement and the disabled students’ autonomy.
This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“…I think training on specific strategies for SENS and SEN students is necessary…”
PROF-27.
“…Ongoing training in intervention strategies for students with SENS and SEN. This allows us to keep up to date on best practices and evidence-based approaches…”
PROF-13.
“…We need training on how to intervene with students with SENS and SEN, guidelines, strategies to identify them, etc.”
PROF-36.
“…I consider that it is essential to be trained in teaching-learning strategies aimed at students with SENS and SEN in our autonomous community, …”
PROF-43.

3.1.7. Curricular Adaptation

This category is represented by five units of meaning. All of them refer to the need for training in order to adjust or modify different elements of the educational programme to provide a response that is adapted to the needs of SENS and SEN students. This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“…Development of materials tailored to the specific needs of students, families and faculty, …”
PROF-23.
“…Teachers have to take into account SENS and SEN student characteristics in order to carry out curricular adaptations individually, …”
PROF-39.
“…We need material resources adapted to SEN students’ needs…”
PROF-2.

3.1.8. Inclusive Practices

This category has two subcategories (Figure 11). Three of the four units of meaning are related to the creation of an inclusive school culture and acceptance of diversity, building a safe and secure environment that accepts, collaborates with, and encourages all its members, generating attitudes of respect towards diversity. This last point is related to the design of activities and programmes that encourage SENS and SEN student participation. In this case, there was one request to learn to design activities where everyone gets involved. This would involve making a plan of action to increase teachers’ knowledge and skills to encourage SENS and SEN students in school learning and recreational activities.
This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“…With the aim of promoting personal integration within the classroom, offer training to help them to work with their group on the sense of belonging of their students, …”
PROF-2.
“…it is necessary that teachers and students accept diversity in the classroom, …”
PROF-14.
“… Activities to promote SENS and SEN students’ inclusion are needed…”
PROF-16.

3.1.9. Awareness Training for SENS and SEN Students

Teachers’ attitudes—understood as perceptions, beliefs and feelings for or against—determine the way they approach diversity. In this category, the two units of meaning indicate that teachers of SENS and SEN students must have positive attitudes of respect, appreciation and tolerance towards their students. This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“… receive training that offers teachers a different perspective in their approach to SENS students, and more specifically SEN students, that helps them to develop empathy and connect with their students, …”
PROF-2.
“…Teachers should promote positive and tolerant attitudes towards their students, particularly those with SENS and SEN…”
PROF-23.

3.2. Personal Resources Dimension

In terms of personal resources, teachers mentioned five professionals in the field of education, who formed five subcategories (sign language interpreter (ILSE), communication mediator (MEDCOM), guidance counsellor (ORI), hearing and speech therapist (MAESAL) and SEN specialist teacher (PROFESNEAE)). The two most requested professionals were the SEN Specialist Teacher (PROFESNEAE) (20 content units) and the Guidance Counsellor (ORI) (17 content units) (Figure 12). These two professionals are characterised by their specific knowledge regarding support for SENS and SEN students.
This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“Participation of SENS specialist teachers in meetings about Tutorial Action Plans, coordination spaces not only in the CCP or department meetings but also in teaching teams, spaces for welcoming students, teachers, and families, …”
PROF-2.
“…Strengthen the Zone EOEPs and the Specific EOEPs, not only in terms of staff but also in terms of material…”
PROF-42.

3.3. Material Resources Dimension

In the material resources dimension, there were three categories (Figure 13): adapted materials (MATADP), technology (TECNO) and communication support resources (RECACOM). Among the 59 units of meanings, 26 refer to the need to use technological devices (tablets, software, word processors, etc.), 23 refer to the need for material specifically designed and developed to be used by SEN and SENS students, and 10 refer to the need for more communication support resources.
This is exemplified by the following excerpts from the interviews:
“…apps and ICT have become normalised and are already a part of our reality. This fact in an increasing reality and has opened up new possibilities for the school…”
PROF-19.
“…To have the technological resources that allow us to be in continuous contact with families and students (WEBEX, school blog, Gsuite…). The centre has to be sure about the technological resources that families have at home, …”
PROF-30.
“…Adaptation of materials for diversity among the student body in general and in particular for SEN and SENS students, …”
PROF-9.
“…spaces and digital educational resources with easy access and use. From virtual classrooms, platforms such as educational applications, communication tools, that is to say, the use of tools that allow for effective and safe contact with students and families, …”
PROF-9.

3.4. Relationships between the Three Dimensions of This Study

Figure 14 shows the interaction between the nine categories that make up the training dimension and the personal and material resources dimensions. Red lines reflect the close relationship between the need for teacher training in emotional education and the demand for a greater number of personal and material resources to respond to SEN and SENS students. This is evident in the number of interactions, for example, between emotional education and material resources (n = 27).
This suggests that the interaction between emotional education and material resources is particularly relevant.

4. Discussion

This study provides an analysis of the training of secondary school teachers to identify their needs and the human and material resources currently available to respond to students with SEN, with a view to improving future teacher training.
One of the revelations of this study is that secondary school teachers did not ask for training in SEN but for expert help in dealing with these students. They also asked for training in emotional education, which is necessary to deal with all types of pupils. This could be due to the profile of the secondary school teacher: a subject specialist who does not necessarily take on the role of an educator. On the contrary, nursery and primary school teachers see themselves as educators. This situation will continue as long as the training of secondary school teachers remains unchanged [53,54].
In the Autonomous Community of the Canary Islands, the first action point in the 2024-27 Training Plan is ‘curriculum development, methodological and didactic updating’. It states that teachers should acquire knowledge about emotional education in order to be able to deal with it in a transversal way in different contexts and at all levels of education. The second action point does not refer to this issue but to attention to diversity, where most of the training proposals are aimed at specific topics according to the needs of the pupils.
In their study, López et al. [14] point to a lack of updating in the initial training of ESO teachers, which is particularly noticeable in the Master’s Degree in Secondary Education with regard to the critical factors of teaching, which raises the need for a reform of the model. In terms of in-service training, there is a lack of alignment with current challenges, both in terms of teaching and educational remuneration, suggesting a significant change in the model of in-service training to bring greater benefits to teachers and the education system.
Studies on teacher training conclude that the training model needs to be reformed, as there is evidence that it is not preparing teachers for the new educational demands of future students [14,55,56].
In Spain, a new model has been under discussion for several years, inspired by the model of the health system and the procedure for access to the specialised medical profession [55,57]. This model consists of doctors who pass an exam to choose a speciality, complete a four-year residency, receive practical and theoretical training and work under the supervision of specialists.
In the context of the debate on the training model, this article focuses on the training needs of teachers in the field of SEN in order to provide an individualised and specialised educational response, as well as in the field of emotional education in order to have more strategies to promote the participation and autonomy of these students in the classroom.
It can be affirmed that the training needs of the teachers were not exclusively focused on the attention of the SEN students but also included emotional education. Teachers need to learn how to manage conflict by promoting respect and tolerance, mutual support and also to act as natural mediators to facilitate communication and problem-solving. Similar results have been obtained by Arias-Pastor [18] and Torrijos Fincias et al. [58], as well as by authors of other recent studies.
This situation is similar in European universities [59], contrary to the UNESCO recommendations (2022), which state that teacher education is the basis for the acquisition of skills and knowledge by students. These facts point to the idea that the acquisition of emotional skills and competencies by teachers has an impact on the teaching–learning process, as well as on teaching practices that favour the acquisition of these competencies in students [60].
Although teachers claim that they need more training in emotional education [48,50], we agree with Bayón [61] that the development of emotional education programmes based on the application of emotional management techniques for the exclusive development of students is not the key. Rather, programmes should be implemented to develop teachers’ emotional competencies as a necessary part of their professional development. Moreover, as Jennings and Greenberg [62] point out, the emotional competencies that teachers need to acquire are different from those of any other person or worker.
For Barrientos et al. [63], the need for training in emotional education is explained by the fact that teachers feel discouraged by the attitudes and behaviours of students in the classroom since the strategies they use do not work in the same way as they did a few years ago, as reflected in the results of this study. One of the reasons cited by Hernández-Prados et al. [64] is the great diversity of the student population, which affects school life. Similarly, other studies have shown that teachers with better emotional regulation promote an appropriate classroom climate and relationships [58,64].
This need for training expressed by teachers is not new, as they also state that the training they have received so far in social and emotional competencies has been scarce or insufficient [48,61], which affects learning [62,63]. In the case of Latin American countries, studies by Bisquerra and Mateo [65] confirm that 90% of Latin American teachers do not receive this training [65,66,67].
In relation to ICT, an increase in ICT training has been observed. This is an investment in improving the quality of education, as research shows that, the better the attitudes and knowledge of ICT, the better the academic performance of students with SEN [68,69,70,71]. Nevertheless, teachers are calling for more specific training.
Numerous research studies confirm that ICT can make a positive contribution to educational inclusion [65,67], but this study agrees with the findings of Gómez-Marí et al. [53] that the use of ICT is highly dependent on teachers’ knowledge and how they use technological resources. Studies indicate that teachers are not sufficiently prepared to use ICT with SENS students [72,73,74], as this study shows.
This work is a first step in identifying the needs of secondary school teachers in the Canary Islands (Spain). It is necessary to continue with other studies using mixed methodologies that not only validate but also disseminate the initial results, making the conclusions more solid and generalisable. It can be concluded that these new studies would require an interdisciplinary approach and an in-depth search for different perspectives and contexts.
Finally, the results highlight the urgent need for continuous training of teachers in order to meet the needs of pupils with SEN. This observation, although not directly related to the methodological limitations of this study, is fundamental to understanding the context in which the research took place and identifying areas for future intervention.

5. Conclusions

This study provides an overview of the training and resources required by secondary school teachers in order to support SENS and SEN students. The main conclusions regarding training needs focus on emotional education, mainly on the acquisition of skills and competencies for classroom management. The other training topics, which are more related to SENS and SEN students, were not mentioned as often or attributed the same importance by teachers. This situation, together with the demand for professionals with expertise in SENS and SEN, led us to the following conclusions: that secondary school teachers focus on the care of students as a whole and consider that professional experts should be available to care for SENS and SEN students and that teachers, in general, do not feel prepared to care for these students. This means that, in order to meet SDG 4, there is a need to strengthen awareness, education and training of secondary school teachers. This article is further evidence of the need to change teacher training at the most basic levels of study, which, as we know, has not undergone any major changes since the 19th century.

Author Contributions

Each author has made substantial contributions to this work and agrees to be personally accountable for the author’s own contributions and for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately researched, resolved and documented in the literature. Conceptualization, M.d.C.R.-J. and M.C.G.-A. methodology, M.d.C.R.-J., I.P.-A. and M.C.G.-A.; formal analysis, M.d.C.R.-J., I.P.-A. and M.C.G.-A.; investigation, M.d.C.R.-J., I.P.-A. and M.C.G.-A.; data curation, M.d.C.R.-J.; Writing—Original draft preparation, M.d.C.R.-J.; Writing—Review and editing, M.d.C.R.-J. and M.C.G.-A.; visualization, I.P.-A.; supervision, M.d.C.R.-J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the following projects: IECVAD-COVID19. Inclusion in education and quality of life of students with disabilities; the effect of COVID-19 on the educational response to students in primary education: Compulsory Secondary Education (ESO), Baccalaureate, Basic Vocational Training Cycles, Intermediate Level Vocational Training (CF2 and CD2), Higher Level Vocational Training (CF3, CD3) and Adapted Vocational Training Programs (PFPA) of the Canary Islands, Reference: 2020EDU04. Fundation CajaCanarias and Fundation La Caixa.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The Ethical Committee of University of La Laguna approved this study (reference number CEIBA 2021-0462). All participants were treated according to the Declaration of Helsinki (1964–2013); they were informed about their involvement in developing the questionnaire and their rights. and gave informed consent to participate. To preserve privacy, all statistical analyses were conducted on anonymized data.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due for privacy reasons and are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

Are made to the secondary school teachers who participated in the interviews in order to achieve the objectives of the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Organización de Naciones Unidas. Transformar Nuestro Mundo: La Agenda 2030 Para el Desarrollo Sostenible; ONU: Nueva York, NY, USA, 2015; Available online: https://sdgs.un.org/es/2030agenda (accessed on 25 May 2024).
  2. Quintero, J.; Baldiris, S.; Rubira, R.; Cerón, J.; Velez, G. Augmented reality in educational inclusion. A systematic review on the last decade. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 467496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ainscow, M. Inclusión educativa: Una agenda de reforma global. Cuad. Pedagog. 2021, 526, 68–73. [Google Scholar]
  4. Sider, S.; Ainscow, M.; Carington, S.; Shields, C.; Mavropoulou, S.; Nepal, S.; Daw, K. Educación inclusiva en Inglaterra, Australia, Estados Unidos y Canadá: Quo Vadis? Except. Educ. Int. 2024, 34, 55–72. [Google Scholar]
  5. UNESCO. Informe de Seguimiento de la Educación en el Mundo, 2020: Inclusión y Educación: Todos y Todas Sin Excepción; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Francisco, M.P.B.; Hartman, M.; Wang, Y. Inclusion and special education. Educ. Sci. 2020, 10, 238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, X.; Tlili, A.; Nascimbeni, F.; Burgos, D.; Huang, R.; Chang, T.; Jemni, M.; Khribi, M.K. Accessibility within open educational resources and practices for disabled learners: A systematic literature review. Smart Learn. Env. 2020, 7, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ley Orgánica 3/2020, de 29 de diciembre, por la que se modifica la Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de mayo, de Educación. BOE nº 340, de 30 de diciembre de 2020. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/lo/2020/12/29/3 (accessed on 23 April 2024).
  9. Sicilia, G.; Simancas, R. Eficiencia y equidad educativa en España: Un análisis comparativo a nivel regional. Hacienda Pública Española/Rev. Public Econ. 2023, 245, 7–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cepillo Galvín, M.; Zebda, S. El plan de acción de integración e inclusión de la UE (2021–2027) y su aplicación en España. In Políticas Públicas en Defensa de la Inclusión, la Diversidad y el Género IV; Yurrebaso Macho, A., Seixas Vicente, I., Cabezas Vicente, M., Eds.; Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca: Salamanca, Spain, 2021; pp. 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bataller, M.; Pla-Viana, L.; Villaescusa, M. Cómo movilizamos al profesorado, desde la formación, para la transformación de los centros. In Acompañar la Inclusión Escolar; Dykinson: Madrid, Spain, 2020; pp. 81–89. [Google Scholar]
  12. Vaillant, D.; Marcelo García, C. Formación inicial del profesorado: Modelo actual y llaves para el cambio. REICE. Rev. Iberoam. Sobre Calid. Efic. Cambio En Educ. 2021, 19, 55–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chunga Díaz, T.O. La importancia de la inteligencia emocional en la práctica docente. Cent. Sur. Soc. Sci. J. 2021, 4, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. López, F.; García, I.; Expósito, E. Formación inicial y formación permanente del profesorado de educación secundaria en España. Bordón Rev. Pedagog. 2021, 73, 65–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Orden EDU/3498/2011, de 16 de diciembre, por la que se modifica la Orden ECI/3858/2007, de 27 de diciembre, por la que se establecen los requisitos para la verificación de los títulos universitarios oficiales que habiliten para el ejercicio de las profesiones de Profesor de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria y Bachillerato, Formación Profesional y Enseñanzas de Idiomas. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/o/2011/12/16/edu3498 (accessed on 11 April 2024).
  16. Orden ECI/3858/2007, de 27 de diciembre, por la que se establecen los requisitos para la verificación de los títulos universitarios oficiales que habiliten para el ejercicio de las profesiones de Profesor de Educación Secundaria Obligatoria y Bachillerato, Formación Profesional y Enseñanzas de Idiomas. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/o/2007/12/27/eci3858/con (accessed on 11 April 2024).
  17. Nieto, J.M.; Alfageme-González, M.B. Enfoques, metodologías y actividades de formación docente. Profesorado. Rev. Currículum Form. Profr. 2017, 21, 63–81. [Google Scholar]
  18. Arias-Pastor, M.; Van Vaerenbergh, S.; Fernández-Solana, J.; González-Bernal, J.J. Secondary Education Teacher Training and Emotional Intelligence: Ingredients for Attention to Diversity in an Inclusive School for All. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Arvelo-Rosales, C.N.; Alegre de la Rosa, O.M.; Guzmán-Rosquete, R. Initial training of primary school teachers: Development of competencies for inclusion and attention to diversity. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Garzón, P.; Calvo Álvarez, M.I.; Orgaz Baz, B. Inclusión educativa. Actitudes y estrategias del profesorado. Rev. Española Discapac. REDIS 2016, 4, 25–45. [Google Scholar]
  21. Felipe-Rello, C.; Garoz Puerta, I.; Tejero-González, C.M. Cambiando las actitudes hacia la discapacidad: Diseño de un programa de sensibilización en Educación Física (Changing attitudes towards disability: Design of an awareness program in Physical Education). Retos. Nuevas Tend. En Educ. Física Deporte Y Recreación 2020, 37, 713–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Gómez Jiménez, O.; Rodríguez Torres, J.; Cruz Cruz, P. La competencia digital del profesorado y la atención a la diversidad durante la COVID 19. Estudio de caso. Rev. Comun. Salud 2020, 10, 483–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Valencia-Peris, A.; Mínguez-Alfaro, P.; Martos-García, D. La formación inicial del profesorado de Educación Física: Una mirada desde la atención a la diversidad. Retos 2020, 37, 597–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Florian, L. On the necessary co-existence of special and inclusive education. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 2019, 23, 691–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Alejandro Contento, K.J.; Erraéz Alvardo, J.L.; Vargas Gaona, M.d.C.; Espinoza Freire, E.E. Consideraciones sobre la educación inclusiva. Rev. Metrop. Cienc. Apl. 2018, 1, 18–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bisquerra, R.; López-Cassá, È. Educación Emocional: 50 Preguntas y Respuestas; Editorial El Ateneo: Madrid, Spain, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  27. Cejudo, J.; López-Delgado, M.L. Importancia de la inteligencia emocional en la práctica docente: Un estudio con maestros. Psicol. Educ. 2017, 23, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Mora Miranda, N.; Martínez-Otero Pérez, V.; Santander Trigo, S.; Gaeta González, M.L. Inteligencia emocional en la formación del profesorado de educación infantil y primaria. Perspect. Edu. 2022, 61, 53–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Villarreal, V.D. Competencia emocional en el profesorado de diferentes niveles educativos: Una revisión de la literatura. Investig. Valdizana 2022, 16, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Méndez, V.G.; Suelves, D.M.; Méndez, C.G.; Mas, J.A.R.L. Future teachers facing the use of technology for inclusion: A view from the digital competence. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2023, 28, 9305–9323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Cáceres, M.P.; Ramos, M.; Berral, B. Las Tic Como Herramientas de Inclusión Educativa. Metodologías Activas con Recursos Metodológicos. Perspectivas y Enfoques Docentes; Avicam: Granada, Spain, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  32. Fernández Batanero, J.M.; Reyes Rebollo, M.M.; El Homrani, M. TIC y discapacidad. Principales barreras para la formación del profesorado. EDMETIC Rev. Educ. Mediática Y TIC 2018, 7, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Palacios-Rodríguez, A.; Martín-Párraga, L. Formación del profesorado en la era digital. Nivel de innovación y uso de las TIC según el marco común de referencia de la competencia digital docente. Rev. Investig. Y Evaluación Educ. 2021, 8, 38–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Fernández Batanero, J.M.; Sañudo, F.; Montenegro Rueda, M.; García Martínez, I. Physical Education Teachers and Their ICT Training Applied to Students with Disabilities. Case Spain. Sustain. 2019, 11, 2259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Cabero-Almenara, J.; Guillén-Gámez, F.D.; Ruiz-Palmero, J.; Palacios-Rodríguez, A. Teachers’ digital competence to assist students with functional diversity: Identification of factors through logistic regression methods. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2021, 53, 41–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Fernández-Batanero, J.M. TIC y Discapacidad: Investigación e Innovación Educativa; Octaedro: Madrid, Spain, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  37. Solas-Martínez, T.; Cáceres-Reche, M.P.; Romero-Rodríguez, J.J.; Ramos-Navas-Parejo, M. Estudio Bibliométrico de los documentos indexados en Scopus sobre la Formación del Profesorado en TIC que se relacionan con la Calidad Educativa. Rev. Electrónica Interuniv. Form. Profr. 2020, 23, 19–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Fernández-Batanero, J.M.; Montenegro-Rueda, M.; Fernández-Cerero, J. Are primary education teachers trained for the use of the technology with disabled students? Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn. 2022, 17, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gallardo-Montes, C.D.P.; Caurcel Cara, M.J.; Rodríguez Fuentes, A.; Capperucci, D. Opinions, training and requirements regarding ICT of educators in Florence and Granada for students with functional diversity. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2024, 23, 889–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Meneses, E.L.; Cerero, J.F. Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación y diversidad funcional. Conocimiento y formación del profesorado en Navarra. IJERI Int. J. Educ. Res. Innov. 2020; 59–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Rodríguez, M.; Arroyo, M.J. Las TIC al servicio de la inclusión educativa. Digit. Educ. Rev. 2014, 25, 108–126. [Google Scholar]
  42. González, I.; Macías, D. La formación permanente como herramienta para mejorar la intervención del maestro de educación física con alumnado con discapacidad (Lifelong learning as a tool to improve physical education teachers’ intervention with students with disabilities). Retos. Nuevas tendencias en Educación Física, Deportes y Recreación 2018, 33, 118–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Arnaiz, P.; De Haro, R. ¿Hacia dónde va la escuela inclusiva? Análisis y necesidades de cambio en centros educativos. In Acompañar la Inclusión Escolar; Moliner García, O., Ed.; Dykinson, S.L: Madrid, Spain, 2020; pp. 33–46. [Google Scholar]
  44. Díaz, M.; Villagra, A.; Castejón, F.J. Coordination between physical education teachers and physical therapists in physical education classes: The case of the autonomous community of Madrid in Spain. Movimiento 2019, 25, e25015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Cascone, C.; de Cesare, G.R.; D’Elia, F. Physical education teacher training for disability. J. Hum. Sport Exerc. 2020, 15, 634–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Knight, C.; Clegg, Z.; Conn, C.; Hutt, M.; Crick, T. Aspiring to include versus implicit ‘othering’: Teachers’ perceptions of inclusive education in wales. Br. J. Spec. Educ. 2022, 49, 6–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Leiva-Olivencia, J.J.; López-Berlanga, M.C.; Espigares, A.M.; Lirola, F.V. Compulsory education teachers’ perceptions of resources, extracurricular ac-tivities and inclusive pedagogical training in Spain. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Ley 6/2014, de 25 de julio, Canaria de Educación no Universitaria. BOE nº 238, de 1 de octubre de 2014. Available online: https://www3.gobiernodecanarias.org/medusa/edublog/ceipaguadulce/wp-content/uploads/sites/654/2014/08/ley-canaria-de-educacion-no-universitaria.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
  49. Decreto 25/2018, de 26 de febrero, por el que se regula la atención a la diversidad en el ámbito de las enseñanzas no universitarias de la Comunidad Autónoma de Canarias. Available online: https://www.cedid.es/es/documentacion/ver-legislacion-novedad/532207/ (accessed on 9 April 2024).
  50. Creswell, J.W.; Poth, C.N. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches; Sage Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  51. Kuckartz, U. Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice and Using Software; Sage: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  52. Carl, N.M.; Ravitch, S.M. Interviews. In The SAGE Ency-Clopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation; Frey, B.B., Ed.; Sage Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 872–876. [Google Scholar]
  53. Gómez-Marí, I.; Lacruz-Pérez, I.; Sanz-Cervera, P. Percepciones y actitudes del profesorado hacia el uso de la tecnología como una herramienta inclusiva. Reidocrea 2023, 12, 86–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. López-Gavira, R.; Moriña, A.; Morgado, B. Challenges to inclusive education at the university: The perspective of students and disability support service staff. Innov. Eur. J. Soc. Sci. Res. 2021, 34, 292–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. López, F. La profesión docente en la perspectiva del siglo XXI: Modelos de acceso a la profesión, desarrollo profesional e interacciones. Rev. Educ. 2021, 393, 69–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Manso, J.; Garrido-Martos, R. Formación inicial y acceso a la profesión: Qué demandan los docentes. Rev. Educ. 2021, 393, 293–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Egido Gálvez, M.I. Los modelos médicos aplicados al profesorado: La propuesta del “MIR educativo” a la luz de las experiencias internacionales de iniciación a la profesión docente. Rev. Educ. 2021, 393, 207–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Torrijos Fincias, P.; Martín Izard, J.F.; Rodríguez Conde, M.J. La educación emocional en la formación permanente del profesorado no universitario. Profr. Rev. Currículum Form. Profr. 2018, 22, 57–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Jeon, L.; Ardeleanu, K. Work climate in early care and education and teachers’ stress: Indirect associations through emotion regulation. Early Educ. Dev. 2020, 31, 1031–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ulloa, M.; Evans, I.; Jones, L.C. The effects of emotional awareness training on teachers’ ability to manage the emotions of preschool children: An experimental study. Escr. Psicol. 2016, 9, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Bayón, A. Competencia emocional docente, ¡la (r)evolución interior! Rev. Padres Y Maest. 2015, 361, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Jennings, P.; GreenBerg, M. The Prosocial Classroom: Teacher Social and Emotional Competence in Relation to Student and Classroom outcomes. Rev. Educ. Res. 2009, 1, 491–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Barrientos, A.; Sánchez, R.; Arigita, A. Formación emocional del profesorado y gestión del clima de su aula. Prax. Saber 2019, 10, 119–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hernández-Prados, M.Á.; Penalva López, A.; Guerrero Romera, C. Profesorado y convivencia escolar: Necesidades formativas. Magister 2020, 32, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Bisquerra, R.; Mateo, J. Competencias Emocionales Para un Cambio de Paradigma en Educación; Horsori Editorial: Madrid, Spain, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  66. López-Goñi, I.; Goñi, J.M. La competencia emocional en los currículos de formación inicial de los docentes. Un estudio comparativo. Rev. Educ. 2012, 357, 467–489. [Google Scholar]
  67. Flores, M.A. Learning to teach: Knowledge, competences and support in initial teacher education and in the early years of teaching. Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2020, 43, 127–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Pérez-Sáenz, J.; Díez-Gómez, A.; Pérez-Albéniz, A.; Fonseca-Pedrero, E. Educación emocional en el futuro docente: Una asignatura pendiente. In Propuestas de Innovación Para el Desarrollo en Contextos Educativos; Universidad de La Rioja: La Rioja, Spain, 2023; pp. 143–152. [Google Scholar]
  69. González Rivas, R.A.; Gastélum-Cuadras, G.; Velducea, W.; González Bustos, J.B.; Domínguez Esparza, S. Analysis of teaching experience in Physical Education classes during COVID-19 confinement in Mexico. Retos-Nuevas Tend. En Educ. Física Deporte Y Recreación 2021, 42, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  70. Moreno, M.; Morán, L.; Gómez, L.; Solís, P.; Alcedo, M. Actitudes hacia las personas con discapacidad: Una revisión de la literatura. Rev. Española Discapac. 2022, 10, 7–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Yakubova, G.; Kellems, R.O.; Chen, B.B.; Cusworth, Z. Practitioners’ Attitudes and Perceptions Toward the Use of Augmented and Virtual Reality Technologies in the Education of Students with Disabilities. J. Spec. Educ. Technol. 2021, 37, 286–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Mas, V.; Gabarda, V.; Peirats, J. Formación y competencia digital del profesorado de Educación Secundaria en España. Texto Livre 2023, 16, e44851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Kazan, S.; El-Daou, B. The Relationship between Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, Attitudes towards ICT Usefulness and Students’ Science Performance in the Lebanese Inclusive Schools 2015. World J. Educ. Technol. Curr. Issues 2016, 8, 277–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Pinto-Llorente, A.; Sánchez-Gómez, M. Perceptions and Attitudes of Future Primary Education Teachers on Technology and Inclusive Education. J. Inf. Technol. Res. 2020, 13, 37–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disabilities 04 00054 g001
Figure 1. Age distribution of teachers.
Figure 1. Age distribution of teachers.
Disabilities 04 00054 g001
Disabilities 04 00054 g002
Figure 2. Years of teaching experience.
Figure 2. Years of teaching experience.
Disabilities 04 00054 g002
Disabilities 04 00054 g003
Figure 3. Hierarchical code model: training. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 3. Hierarchical code model: training. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g003
Disabilities 04 00054 g004
Figure 4. Emotional education subcode. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 4. Emotional education subcode. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g004
Disabilities 04 00054 g005
Figure 5. Code–subcode segment model: emotional education. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 5. Code–subcode segment model: emotional education. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g005
Disabilities 04 00054 g006
Figure 6. Category and subcategory: technology and resources. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 6. Category and subcategory: technology and resources. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g006
Disabilities 04 00054 g007
Figure 7. Category and subcategory: family. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 7. Category and subcategory: family. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g007
Disabilities 04 00054 g008
Figure 8. Category and subcategory: collaboration. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 8. Category and subcategory: collaboration. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g008
Disabilities 04 00054 g009
Figure 9. Category and subcategory: theoretical foundations. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 9. Category and subcategory: theoretical foundations. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g009
Disabilities 04 00054 g010
Figure 10. Category and subcategory: intervention strategies. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 10. Category and subcategory: intervention strategies. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g010
Disabilities 04 00054 g011
Figure 11. Category and subcategory: inclusive practices. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 11. Category and subcategory: inclusive practices. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g011
Disabilities 04 00054 g012
Figure 12. Code co-occurrence model: personal resources. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 12. Code co-occurrence model: personal resources. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g012
Disabilities 04 00054 g013
Figure 13. Code co-occurrence model: material resources. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 13. Code co-occurrence model: material resources. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g013
Disabilities 04 00054 g014
Figure 14. Code co-occurrence model: categories. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Figure 14. Code co-occurrence model: categories. Source: MAXQDA 2020 output (2024).
Disabilities 04 00054 g014
Table 1. Dimensions and open-ended questions (semi-structured interview).
Table 1. Dimensions and open-ended questions (semi-structured interview).
DimensionsQuestions
TrainingWhat specific training have you received in relation to the care of SENS and SEN students?
Personal
resources		What personal resources do you consider necessary to support SENS and SEN students in your classroom?
Material
resources		What material resources do you use or consider necessary to support SENS and SEN students in your classroom?
Table 2. Training dimension: categories, subcategories, description and codes.
Table 2. Training dimension: categories, subcategories, description and codes.
CategorySubcategoryDescriptionCode
Sensitisation
Training
for SENS and
SEN Students		Understanding and appreciation of individual differencesPromote understanding and appreciation of the differencesSENSI
Theoretical basisConcept and types of SENS and SENDefinition and classificationFCCON
Legal and regulatory framework for attention to diversityRegulation applicable to SENS and SEN studentsFCNOR
Model and approach for inclusive educationSets of rules and procedures for responsesFCMOD
Evolutionary development and characteristics of SENS and SEN studentsKnowledge of evolutionary stagesFCCAR
Curricular material adaptationsMaterial adapted to the needs of students with SENS and SENAdjustments and modifications made to the different elements of the curriculum to meet their needsACUMA
Intervention strategiesTeaching–learning intervention strategies for SENS and SEN careProcedures implemented to achieve meaningful learningEIEA
Strategies to promote student participation and autonomyProcedures implemented to achieve meaningful learningEPAR
Inclusive practicesDesign of activities and programs that promote student participationActions implemented to promote student access and participation in the different areas of the centrePRADA
Creation of an inclusive school culture and acceptance of differencesSet of actions to generate values and beliefs that favour inclusionPRACUL
CollaborationTeamwork with other professionalsWorking with different professionals towards a common goal, exchanging knowledge and experienceCOLEQU
Networking with the rest of the teachers in the schoolGenerate a space for cooperation to exchange information and achieve the objectivesCOLRED
Coordination with external support servicesEstablish relationships with agents outside the educational centreCOLSERV
Emotional EducationTo develop students’ emotional and social skillsTo train students to establish healthy relationships and manage their emotionsEEHAB
Strategies for emotion management and conflict resolutionTo train students to learn how to manage conflict situations in the centre or in other contextsEEGES
Creating emotionally safe and supportive classroom environmentsLearning to manage the climate and the relationships established in the classroomEESEG
FamilyInvolve and collaborate with the families of SENS and SEN studentsLearning to generate cooperative work with familiesFAMCOL
Recognition of the family’s role in the educational processTo sensitise and make teachers aware of the role and importance of families in the school contextFAMPAPEL
Strategy to encourage the active participation of families in educationLearn strategies to encourage family participation and involvement in the centreFAMPAR
Technology and resourcesUse of technology and resources to support the education of SENS and SEN studentsLearning how to use ICT tools to promote student learningTECUSO
Specific resources depending on the type of SENS and SENTo be aware of specific tools for each SENS and SENTECRE
Table 3. Material and personal resources dimension: categories, description and codes.
Table 3. Material and personal resources dimension: categories, description and codes.
DimensionCategoryDescriptionCode
Personal resourcesLSE InterpreterProfessional who interprets simultaneously between spoken Spanish and Spanish Sign Language (LSE) to facilitate information accessILSE
Communication mediatorProfessional who supports deaf, deafblind and people with communication disorders in their interaction with the environment, to facilitate communicationMEDCOM
Hearing and Language TeacherProfessionals who work with students to enhance their communicative and linguistic skills according to the school’s guidelinesORI
Teacher specialising in SENSInvolves developing a deep and empathetic understanding of the needs, challenges, and potential of these students, as well as promoting positive attitudesMAESAL
CounsellorProfessionals who are responsible for supporting students academically, socially and personally to help them thrive. They give advice to teachers who care for SENS and SEN studentsPROFESNEAE
Material ResourcesAdapted didactic materialMaterials adapted to the needs of students (Braille books, audiovisual resources, subtitles, etc.)MATADP
Communication supportAugmented and alternative communication system to support communication (pictograms, communication boards, voice communication applications, LSE, shadow teacher)RECACOM
TechnologyTechnology that facilitates access and participation of SENS and SEN students in their educational process (accessibility applications, augmented or alternative communication devices or screen reading software)TECNO
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rodríguez-Jiménez, M.d.C.; Puerta-Araña, I.; González-Afonso, M.C. Qualitative Study to Identify the Training and Resource Needs of Secondary School Teachers in Responding to Students with SEN and SENS. Disabilities 2024, 4, 872-892. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities4040054

AMA Style

Rodríguez-Jiménez MdC, Puerta-Araña I, González-Afonso MC. Qualitative Study to Identify the Training and Resource Needs of Secondary School Teachers in Responding to Students with SEN and SENS. Disabilities. 2024; 4(4):872-892. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities4040054

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rodríguez-Jiménez, María del Carmen, Irene Puerta-Araña, and Miriam Catalina González-Afonso. 2024. "Qualitative Study to Identify the Training and Resource Needs of Secondary School Teachers in Responding to Students with SEN and SENS" Disabilities 4, no. 4: 872-892. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities4040054

APA Style

Rodríguez-Jiménez, M. d. C., Puerta-Araña, I., & González-Afonso, M. C. (2024). Qualitative Study to Identify the Training and Resource Needs of Secondary School Teachers in Responding to Students with SEN and SENS. Disabilities, 4(4), 872-892. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities4040054

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop