Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Students with Disabilities in the Republic of Croatia Ana Blažević Simić 1 and Anamaria Titijevski Vidović 2 • Since teaching English as a foreign language to students with disabilities has so far received little attention in national scientific discourse, which has mostly dealt just with specific subcategories of disabilities, the paper presents research conducted among Croatian primary and secondary teachers of English as a foreign language regarding their inclusive prac - tice. Three research questions were formulated: What kind of education do teachers of English as a foreign language have about inclusion and students with disabilities? What are the experiences of these teachers in teaching students with disabilities? What kind of support do these teachers receive in the schools where they work? A descriptive research design was used, i.e., a qualitative study that included an in-depth in - terpretation of open-ended questions in a self-constructed and piloted questionnaire. The results show that 69.4% of the 98 participants did not have any formal education about inclusion or students with disabilities during their university studies, although 67.4% had attended a profes - sional development programme on this topic. Most of the participants had experience in teaching students with specific learning difficulties (90.8%), and just 12.2% perceived themselves unready to work with students with disabilities. When they needed advice, the participants consulted school support team members, principals, class masters and experts or colleagues outside their school. However, only 15.3% of the teachers perceived the support they received as sufficient. The paper represents a solid starting point for further national research, e.g., on a specific category of students with disabilities or on English as a foreign language teachers working in schools with incomplete school support teams without education-rehabilitation experts. Keywords: English as a foreign language, English as a foreign language teacher, school support team, students with disabilities 1 *Corresponding Author. Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia; ablazevi@ffzg.unizg.hr. 2 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1862 Published on-line as Recently Accepted Paper: October 2024 c e p s Journal teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 2 Poučevanje angleščine kot tujega jezika za učence s posebnimi potrebami v Republiki Hrvaški Ana Blažević Simić in Anamaria Titijevski Vidović • Ker je bilo poučevanje angleščine kot tujega jezika za učence z učnimi težavami do zdaj deležno le malo pozornosti v nacionalnem znanstve - nem diskurzu, ki je večinoma obravnaval le posamezne podkategorije posebnih potreb, je v prispevku predstavljena raziskava, opravljena med hrvaškimi učitelji angleščine kot tujega jezika v osnovnih in srednjih šo - lah, o njihovi inkluzivni praksi. Oblikovana so bila naslednja raziskoval - na vprašanja: Kakšno izobraževanje imajo učitelji angleščine kot tujega jezika o inkluziji in učencih s posebnimi potrebami? Kakšne so izkušnje teh učiteljev pri poučevanju učencev s posebnimi potrebami? Kakšno podporo prejemajo ti učitelji na šolah, na katerih delajo? Uporabljen je bil deskriptivni raziskovalni načrt, tj. kvalitativna študija, ki je vklju - čevala poglobljeno razlago vprašanj odprtega tipa v samostojno sesta - vljenem in preizkušenem vprašalniku. Rezultati kažejo, da 69,4 % od 98 udeležencev med visokošolskim študijem ni imelo nobenega formalne - ga izobraževanja o inkluziji ali učencih s posebnimi potrebami, čeprav se jih je 67 ,4 % udeležilo programa strokovnega razvoja na to temo. V eči - na udeležencev je imela izkušnje s poučevanjem učencev s specifičnimi učnimi težavami (90,8 %) in le 12,2 % jih je menilo, da niso pripravljeni na delo z učenci s posebnimi potrebami. Kadar so potrebovali nasvet, so se udeleženci posvetovali s člani šolske podporne skupine, z ravnatelji, razredniki in s strokovnjaki ali kolegi zunaj šole. Le 15,3 % učiteljev je menilo, da je podpora, ki so jo prejeli, zadostna. Prispevek predstavlja dobro izhodišče za nadaljnje nacionalne raziskave, npr. o posameznih kategorijah učencev s posebnimi potrebami ali učiteljih angleščine kot tujega jezika, ki delajo na šolah z nepopolnimi šolskimi podpornimi skupinami brez strokovnjakov s področja izobraževanja – rehabilitacije. Ključne besede: angleščina kot tuji jezik, učitelj angleščine kot tujega jezika, šolska podporna skupina, učenci s posebnimi potrebami c e p s Journal 3 Introduction Ever since UNESCO’s World Declaration on Education for All (1990) and the Salamanca Statement (1994), we have witnessed a wave of theoretical and empirical research on the concept of inclusive education in both Croa - tian and international scientific discourse (e.g., Hernández-T orrano et al., 2022; Messiou, 2017; Nilholm & Göransson, 2017). Many authors, however, point out that today, almost thirty years later, we still fail to sufficiently ensure the ideal conditions that this fundamental paradigm of modern education implies (Bouillet & Bukvić, 2015; Florian, 2014; Kudek Mirošević & Bukvić, 2017; Nil - holm, 2021). Portelli and Koneeny (2018) go further and claim that we need to regain the gradually eroded courage to address impediments and concerns when advocating for inclusivity in classrooms. In such contexts, it is extremely important that both policymakers and experts employed in the education sys - tem know how to recognise the weaknesses of education policies regarding in - clusion. Teaching English as a foreign language (EFL) to students with disabili - ties (SWD) in Croatia is recognised as one of the weaker points of the education system when it comes to inclusion (e.g., Fišer & Dumančić, 2014; Martan, 2018; Benko & Martinović, 2021; Kałdonek-Crnjaković & Fišer, 2021a). In this paper, SWD are defined in accordance with the Primary and Sec - ondary School Education Act (Official Gazette, 2008a) and the Regulation on Primary and Secondary Education of Students with Developmental Disabilities (Official Gazette, 2015). The former divides SWD into three categories – stu - dents with developmental disabilities; students with difficulties in learning and behavioural or emotional problems; and students with disadvantages arising from educational, socioeconomic, cultural and linguistic factors – while the latter divides students with developmental disabilities into seven groups: vi - sion impairments; hearing impairments; language/speech/voice communica - tion impairments and specific learning difficulties (SLD); physical disabilities and health impairments; intellectual disabilities; behaviour and mental health disorders (ADHD included, A/N); and various impairments in psychophysical development. In the Republic of Croatia, as in almost all European countries, English is learnt by most students during primary and secondary education (Eurydice, 2023). Although SWD are the focus of the current debate on the inclusiveness of the Croatian education system, the category of teaching EFL for SWD is seldom mentioned. The data show that SWD (students with a decision on par - ticipating in an appropriate education programme) currently make up 7.53% of the total student population (Ministry of Science and Education, 2022), yet teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 4 teaching EFL for SWD has received little attention. Moreover, English language teacher education programmes continue to devote little attention to develop - ing teachers’ competence regarding teaching SWD. For example, the number of available courses intended to enable future EFL teachers to gain the com - petences needed to teach SWD differs between study programmes, and such courses are generally minimally represented (Fišer & Dumančić, 2014; Fišer, 2019). Furthermore, most of these courses are elective and students can typi - cally attend only one such course, usually during the second or third year of their undergraduate programme (Fišer, 2018; Martan, 2018). Finally, it should be emphasised that primary schools in Croatia often have an incomplete school support team (SST), who should be the first to pro - vide support and a basic form of professional development to (EFL) teachers. The National Pedagogical Standard of the Primary School Education System (Official Gazette, 2008b) states that SSTs should comprise a pedagogue, a psy - chologist, an education-rehabilitation expert (an educational rehabilitator, a speech therapist and a social pedagogue, A/N), a librarian and a health worker. According to national data from the beginning of the 2022/2023 school year, primary schools currently employ an average of 2.69 SST members (Državni zavod za statistiku Republike Hrvatske, 2023), normally a librarian, a peda - gogue, and either a psychologist or an education-rehabilitation expert (Švegar et al., 2020). In this regard, it should be noted that librarians are the least qual - ified staff members to provide support to teachers in their direct work with SWD. In order to adequately support both teachers and SWD who learn EFL, all stakeholders involved in (language) learning, from teachers to SSTs, teacher trainers, researchers and policymakers, need to understand the extent to which the Croatian national education language policy adequately addresses – or fails to adequately address – the topic of teaching SWD. Previous research on the role of the EFL teacher in inclusive education The key role of teacher preparation and professional development in en - suring inclusive education has been exhaustively researched, focusing mainly on general teacher training and teachers’ beliefs and attitudes (e.g., Avramid - is & Norwich, 2002; de Boer et al., 2011; Hay et al., 2001; Jordan et al., 2009; McHatton & McCray, 2007; Reinke & Moseley, 2002; Saloviita, 2020; Spratt & Florian, 2013; Zagona et al., 2017). Similar national research shows that Croa - tian teachers generally support inclusive education (Nikčević-Milković et al., 2019; Skočić Mihić et al., 2016; Žic Ralić et al., 2020), but perceive themselves as moderately or insufficiently competent for teaching SWD (Bouillet & Bukvić, 2015; Bouillet et al., 2017; Domović et al., 2017). Authors continually point out c e p s Journal 5 two fundamental reasons for this: the fact that higher education institutions for initial teacher education do not offer enough inclusive courses (Batarelo Kokić et al., 2010; Skočić Mihić, 2017) and that the teachers need more support (from SSTs, teaching assistants and specialised institutions) and further professional training (Nikčević-Milković et al., 2019; Kudek Mirošević & Jurčević Lozančić, 2014; Skočić Mihić, 2017). Although, as Nijakowska (2019) points out, most foreign research fo - cuses on language teachers or foreign languages in general, the present study is particularly concerned with findings about how teachers’ self‐confidence in the inclusive classroom is dependent on their knowledge of inclusive practices and underlying theoretical principles (Kahn‐Horwitz, 2015; McCutchen et al., 2009). Studies that focus solely on EFL teachers deal mostly with specific sub - categories of disabilities, particularly dyslexia and other SLD (Nijakowska et al., 2018; Nijakowska, 2019; Žero & Pižorn, 2022), but also deaf and hard-of- hearing students (Domagała-Zyśk & Podlewska, 2019), students who stutter (García-Pastor & Miller, 2019) or students with ADHD (Liontou, 2019). The same applies to the national context, where the few available studies mostly fo - cus on dyslexia and subtopics such as the need for additional education (Fišer, 2018; Karamatić-Brčić & Viljac, 2018), the time-consuming creation of indi - vidual education plans (IEPs) and adaption of teaching materials (Benko & Martinović, 2021; Kałdonek-Crnjaković & Fišer, 2017; Kałdonek-Crnjaković & Fišer, 2021a; Kałdonek-Crnjaković & Fišer, 2021b), evaluation procedures, sup - plementary classes and the decrease in student motivation (Fišer, 2018; Fišer, 2020; Martan et al., 2017). Since previous research highlights the three most common problems (insufficient education, teaching experience and support), the purpose of the present study is to expand the national research to the detected research gap, i.e., to shift the focus from teaching students with dyslexia to the entire popu - lation of SWD and to expand it to both primary and secondary EFL teachers. In order to analyse the state of inclusive practice from the perspective of EFL teachers in Croatia, three research questions were formulated: 1. What kind of education about inclusion and SWD do EFL teachers have? 2. What are their experiences of teaching SWD? 3. What kind of support do they receive in the schools where they work? A descriptive research design was used, i.e., a qualitative study that in - cluded an in-depth interpretation of open-ended questions in a self-construct - ed and piloted questionnaire. teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 6 Method Participants After eliminating participants who had not completed their higher edu - cation in Croatia, 98 Croatian EFL teachers were included in the final sample. The youngest participant was 24 years old and the oldest was 62 years old. The mean age of the participants was 41.5 years. Therefore, we can say that the sam - ple is dominated by participants in their most potent years of service, which should also bring a quality insight into everyday inclusive practice. The sam - ple included 66 primary school teachers and 32 secondary school teachers. The teacher with the least experience had worked as an EFL teacher for three months, while the most experienced participant had worked as an EFL teacher for 39 years. The sample consisted of 95 female and 3 male EFL teachers. Of the participants, 75 had obtained their degree from the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences and 19 from the Faculty of Teacher Education, while 4 did not specify. Although not directly related to the participants, for the purposes of further analysis of the results, we also present data about the size and compo - sition of the SST at the schools in which the participating EFL teachers work (Table 1), which is referenced in more detail within the discussion on the third research question. Table 1 Profiles of members of school support teams School support team Percentage of employed SST members in participant’s school (%) Pedagogue 94.9 Librarian 80.6 Psychologist 53.1 Social pedagogue 17.3 Educational rehabilitator 15.3 Speech therapist 13.3 Instrument Although qualitative questionnaires remain “a relatively novel and often invisible or side-lined method” (Braun et al., 2020, p. 641), we tried to craft a questionnaire consisting of as many open-ended questions as possible. These questions were presented in a fixed order (aligned with the close-ended ques - tions) and the participants responded by typing responses in their own words rather than selecting from predetermined response options. In this way, we c e p s Journal 7 tried to obtain subjective experiences, narratives, practices, positionings and discourses that were as rich as possible (Braun & Clarke, 2013). Additional - ly, the questionnaire was intended to capture what participants emphasise as important, since accessing language and terminology is frequently claimed as the main advantage of qualitative research (Braun et al., 2020). The data col - lection questionnaire was constructed and piloted (with minor changes after the feedback). It contained both closed-ended and open-ended questions to complement each other, whereby the focus was on the in-depth interpretation of the open-ended questions. In other words, we prioritised qualitative data that would offer nuanced, in-depth and hopefully new understandings of the research topic. The first part of the questionnaire consisted of closed-ended and open-ended questions. The closed-ended questions related to general informa - tion about age, gender, type of faculty, place of work, work experience and size/ composition of the SST. These were followed by complementary questions of a closed-ended and open-ended type that examined the attendance of inclusive courses during higher education, concrete experience of teaching SWD, profes - sional development in the field of inclusive education, counselling and support that teachers receive at school, and assessment of the inclusiveness of the par - ticipants’ own teaching. The second part of the questionnaire contained only open-ended questions about the specific design of an inclusive environment in the participants’ EFL teaching (how they adapt the content, materials, space, teaching methods, working time, knowledge testing, etc., using the example of the student disabilities they have encountered). Research design The questionnaire was posted in April 2022 on various Croatian EFL teachers’ Facebook groups and was available online (Google Forms) for two weeks. The analytical process of the in-depth interpretation of the open-end - ed questions included familiarisation with the data and multiple readings of answers prior to commencing the analysis, followed by coding of the data set according to the analytical framework (the three formulated research ques - tions: education, experience and support). This procedure was first carried out individually, after which both authors reviewed and discussed the inter-code reliability together and in several iterations, until they judged that they had ad - equately captured the flavour of the content of the answers (Brod et al., 2009). teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 8 Results Participants’ education on inclusion and SWD As shown in T able 2, more than two thirds of the participants did not have any formal education about inclusion or SWD during their university studies. Nonetheless, 22.4% of them did attend a course during their higher education (e.g., language disorders, inclusive pedagogy, social pedagogy, blindness and second language acquisition, individual differences in language acquisition, psychology, didactics, etc.). However, most of these courses were, according to the respondents, of a general nature. Furthermore, 67.4% of the teachers had attended a professional development programme (at which the topics ranged from preconditions for successful inclusive education to specific categories of SWD such as ADHD, Down syndrome, learning difficulties, autism, dyslexia, phonological difficulties, etc.) in the form of workshops, lectures, conferences and webinars, but also as part of e-Schools projects. Table 2 EFL teachers’ education about inclusion and teaching SWD Education about inclusion/SWD Percentage of participants (%) Attended a course 22.4 Did not attend a course 69.4 Did not remember if they attended a similar course 8.2 Attended a professional development programme 67.4 Did not attend a professional development programme 26.5 Did not remember if they attended a professional development programme on these topics 6.1 Attended a course and a professional development programme 14.3 Did not attend a course and a professional development programme 17.4 Since Article 115 of the Primary and Secondary School Education Act (Official Gazette, 2008a) stipulates teachers’ right and obligation to continually attend professional development programmes, it is encouraging that more than two thirds of the participants had attended such a programme. However, there is still a cohort of 32 teachers (26 who had not attended such programmes and 6 who did not remember if they had attended), of which 17 had not attended a course or any kind of such professional development programmes. This means that 17.4% of the EFL teachers were not formally educated at all about inclusive c e p s Journal 9 education, and that they are potentially left to handle the numerous everyday challenges of teaching SWD themselves. Participants’ experiences in teaching SWD Figure 1 shows that the EFL teachers surveyed had experience in teach - ing students with different types of disabilities. They had the most experience in teaching students with specific learning difficulties (90.8%), students with difficulties in learning and behavioural or emotional problems (85.7%), and stu - dents with behaviour and mental health disorders (78.6%). Six of the teachers stated that they had experience in working with all of the enumerated disabili - ties, one teacher had only worked with students with SLD, while all of the others had experience in working with students with at least two different disabilities. Figure 1 Participants experiences in teaching SWD (types of disabilities) When asked about what kind of difficulty they feel most prepared to teach, the participants were most confident with SLD (44.9%) and intellectual disabilities (14.3%). On the other hand, when asked about which category of students represented the greatest difficulty in providing inclusive EFL teach - ing, they stated autism (22.4%), intellectual disabilities (19.3%) and behaviour disorders (12.2%). Interestingly, just 12.2% of the teachers perceived themselves as unready to work with SWD. When asked whether they perceive their teach - ing as inclusive, almost half of the participants (40.8%) were not sure whether their teaching was inclusive. Such results are not surprising given that previous research has shown that teachers do not have adequate knowledge of either the characteristics of SWD or the relevant teaching methods. teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 10 In the next three questions, the teachers were asked what adjustments they make for each of the three categories of SWD. The answers were very de - tailed. For students with developmental disabilities (e.g., vision impairments, SLD, intellectual disabilities, ADHD), the respondents stated additional time, adjusting/reducing the content, visual representation, using the mother tongue, seating arrangement, assessing knowledge based on the student’s preference (oral/written), etc. For the second category (students with difficulties in learn - ing, students with behavioural or emotional problems) and the third category of SWD (students with disadvantages arising from educational, socioeconomic, cultural and linguistic factors) the teachers mentioned adjustments that include having conversations with the student, creating a pleasant atmosphere in the classroom, expressing approval, having other students help, seating arrange - ment, individual approach, additional time, encouraging the student, etc. The most in-depth and authentic answers were given to the question re - garding the biggest problems when including SWD in EFL classes. At the time the study was conducted, this question had not been researched in Croatia and therefore represents the most valuable part of the findings. A few examples of the problems the participating teachers emphasised most frequently are given below: “Very often the student does nothing in class, or even disrupts the class, which is explained (by parents and assistants) by external factors (fa - tigue, moodiness, etc.) and which makes me powerless. A student with Down who has refused to communicate with me for two years and hides as soon as I approach. Lack of direct and clear communication with par - ents and SST. We are left to fend for ourselves, to evaluate and decide for ourselves, and there will never be a final answer about what is good and how it should be done. ” (P10) “Many SWD in the class (in one class as many as four with content ad - aptations, two of them with assistants, and two more with individuali - sation), which is why I don’t manage to devote enough time to anyone in class – neither to the students with difficulties, nor to the rest of the class. The adapted programme includes students who absolutely can - not master the programme even with adaptation (I have a student in the fifth grade who is linguistically at the level of the second grade!) Also, I do not feel qualified to work with children with multiple disabili - ties and LMR, and more severe behavioural difficulties. I think that the educational rehabilitation programme at university takes five years for a c e p s Journal 11 reason, and it educates experts who have the knowledge and abilities to work with students with difficulties, unlike me, a self-educated teacher who improvises. ” (P76) “Apart from the students, I don’t have feedback on whether it’s good. The fact that the student must have all positive grades, and sometimes it happens that the student simply refuses to work, the pressure of the SST and the belittling of work and effort, the large material expenses borne by the teacher himself. ” (P91) There were, however, many more respondents who focused on chal - lenges such as the reluctance of SWD to get involved due to a lack of self-con - fidence and poor prior knowledge (P58); lack of adequate materials for work and the very time-consuming process of making and adapting everything by themselves (P53); students’ lack of motivation since they are used to low expec - tations (P56); cooperation with teaching assistants (P92); the role of remedial classes (P95); other students’ complaints because some tasks were adapted for SWD (P3); awareness of the knowledge gap of students with intellectual dis - abilities who become resigned over time (P14); disruption of classes by SWD to the extent that class performance is impossible (P49); appropriate assessment (P63); not enough training (P68), etc. Participants’ experiences of the support they receive in their schools In order to differentiate between the support that schools as educational institutions show towards inclusive education and the support that teachers re - ceive from SSTs, the surveyed teachers were first asked whether and how their school supports inclusive education. For most of the EFL teachers, the con - cept of inclusive schools was equated with SWD enrolment. Some respondents mentioned individualisation and adapted IEPs and stated that the SST reacts to the teacher’s suggestions and sends the children for treatment, that cooperation between parents and teachers is nurtured, and that seminars and workshops about SWD are organised, but many of the teachers also used syntagms such as administrational orders, formality, criteria absence or in theory when describ - ing the situation in more detail or within their own limits. The next question analysed whom the teachers consulted about SWD. It could be said that the number of statements that mentioned a specific member of the SST (32 a pedagogue, 15 a psychologist, 11 an educational rehabilitator, 8 a social pedagogue, 3 a speech therapist) is in accordance with the statistics about the size/members of the SST in the teachers’ schools. However, it is possible that teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 12 an SST member was present, but that the teachers did not decide to ask him/ her for help, or they judged that they would need another SST member profile more. A further 12 of the respondents stated that they consulted the SST in general, 2 consulted the principal, 11 a class master, 31 an expert or a colleague outside their school, and 1 parents. Interestingly, 9 of the teachers stated they did not consult anyone, even though (as we checked) they have SST members available in the school, mainly pedagogues and librarians. It is also interest - ing that only 15.3% of the teachers answered that the information they received from the person they contacted was adequate, with the rest answering either that it was inadequate or they were not sure. Discussion We will first look in more detail at RQ1, i.e., questions about the previ - ous education of the EFL teachers about inclusion and SWD, which relate to courses on inclusion they had attended during higher education and additional professional development programmes on the topic of teaching SWD. First, since the courses listed by the participants included general courses, the extent to which the topic of teaching SWD was addressed in these courses remains questionable. Second, the finding that more than two-thirds of the respondents had attended at most one course, which is in accordance with previous research presented in the theoretical part (Fišer, 2019; Kahn‐Horwitz, 2015; Martan, 2018; McCutchen et al., 2009), certainly highlights an issue that the national education policy and study programmes must seriously and promptly consider. Since previous research on the role EFL teachers in inclusive education has shown that EFL teachers need additional training to successfully deal with the challenges of teaching SWD (Benko & Martinović, 2021; Jordan et al., 2009; Karamatić-Brčić & Viljac, 2018) and that they are willing to undergo further education (Fišer, 2018; Martan et al., 2017; Reinke & Moseley, 2002; Spratt & Florian, 2013), we did not expect to find that only 14.3% of the participants had attended both a course and a professional development programme about inclusion or SWD. The data can be partially explained by the cohort of older participants, who received almost no training on inclusion during their stud - ies. However, the mean age of the participants was 41.49 years, so they were in their most potent professional period. Although we cannot talk about data correlation in qualitative research, we can make certain observations about the relationship between age, career courses and narratives (Wilhelmy et al., 2022). The aforementioned result is even more worrying if we consider what the opin - ion and experience of a group of older teachers would be. Such analyses of c e p s Journal 13 separate age groups require additional, future research. Since the newest le - gal document, the National Plan for Equalisation of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities 2021–2027 (Official Gazette, 2021), sets the improvement of the education of SWD and the professional development of teachers in developing IEPs as priorities, we assume that also this cohort will soon have an oppor - tunity to attend appropriate training. As Nijakowska stated (2019), attending programmes of this kind could raise teachers’ awareness and develop positive attitudes, particularly regarding ways of adapting teaching materials and evalu - ation procedures, but such programmes can also affect teacher confidence. Regarding RQ2, which concerned teachers’ experiences with teaching SWD, it was no surprise that the respondents felt most prepared to work with children with SLD, since most of them had experience with students with pre - cisely this type of difficulty. The result that needs to be discussed is the fact that teachers’ opinions on intellectual disabilities diverge. Although the EFL teachers surveyed felt most prepared to work with children with SLD, they also regarded such work as the most challenging teaching experience (the two oth - er disabilities mentioned as the most difficult in terms of providing inclusive teaching were autism and behaviour difficulties). It would be interesting to ask additional questions in this regard, as we can only assume that more dramatic anecdotal experiences lie in the background. Moreover, the respondents ex - tensively elaborated the competences required by an EFL teacher for teaching SWD. The fact that several of the participants freely demonstrated their misun - derstanding of inclusive education (calling it a joke, impossible, wizardry, etc.) does not surprise us. However, one would assume that the legal framework, which has been in place for almost two decades, would change the mindset of education workers, and that the belief that education is considered a non- negotiable human right and not an act of goodwill would be accepted. On the other hand, obeying the law does not remove the right to point out its flaws. If we exclude such pessimistic responses, we can speak about unexpectedly elabo - rated and well-structured answers. This leads us to conclude that the teachers are fully aware of their responsibility and their inappropriate education, and that they are consequently dissatisfied with the way inclusion is carried out, which is in accordance with the several aforementioned national and foreign research studies (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002; de Boer et al., 2011; Bouillet, 2013; Kranjčec Mlinarić et al., 2016). Such detailed answers reaffirm the fact that teachers are unfairly labelled as those who “hamper the development of quality inclusive education” (Bouillet, 2019). In addressing RQ3, which concerns the kind of support teachers receive in their schools, we must first reflect on the size of SSTs and irregularities of teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 14 their member profiles, which is in accordance with the previously presented re - sults of Švegar et al. (2020). In addition, statements in which teachers expressed doubts about the competence of the two most represented SST members (peda - gogue and librarian) clearly point to the following well-known and ubiquitous national problem: although the law states that a pedagogue, among numerous other inclusive assignments, should identify and monitor SWD as well as ad - vising and helping teachers (Official Gazette, 2014), the professional impact of pedagogues is limited by their own education (their study programmes typical - ly have three inclusive courses, often elective) and the specific context of their educational institution (e.g., the number of students, the number of SWD, the profile of other SST members, insufficiently coordinated and available coopera - tion with external specialised institutions and mobile expert teams, etc.). Fu - ture research should therefore focus solely on EFL teachers working in schools with incomplete teams without education-rehabilitation experts in order to obtain more precise answers regarding why teachers perceive the support from SST as insufficient, what their mutual expectations are, and what they see as more coordinated help from the system in general. Although there were many valuable statements, we conclude the discussion with one that best represents the aforementioned situation: “It all boils down to the good will of the teachers, because due to the lack of people in the SST (we only have a pedagogue, despite 736 students in the school), the teachers cannot do everything by themselves and are mostly left to their own devices after being informed that they have a student with difficulties in the class. ” (P87) Conclusion As inclusion laws in many European countries require the least restric - tive educational settings for SWD, many such students, as Nijakowska (2014) points out, find themselves in regular educational settings where they attend EFL classes. In practice, however, neither inclusion laws nor language-learning policies specifically address the language learning needs of SWD. As Portelli and Koneeny (2018) note, in such circumstances one should regain the gradual - ly eroded courage to address impediments and concerns, while advocating for inclusivity in classrooms. The present paper outlines a range of impediments and concerns of EFL teachers. Our results confirm the findings of previous re - search that teachers are not sufficiently formally educated during their studies, while also highlighting the lack of attendance of professional training. Speaking c e p s Journal 15 about experiences and competences in teaching SWD, the participants’ exten - sively elaborated answers reveal an awareness of their responsibility, but also a dissatisfaction with the way inclusion is implemented (especially in relation to the support of the SST). Such results demonstrate that the teachers are aware and motivated, but also sufficiently courageous to address these impediments. At the same time, the (non)fulfilment of the expected inclusive assignments of the EFL teachers regarding SWD, the (dis)satisfaction with their implementa - tion level or the (poor) quality of the achieved results can easily be explained by the teachers’ insufficient education or by shifting responsibility to various other ‘parties’ (the system, SST, teachers or parents). However, a series of in- depth, authentic answers testify to the EFL teachers’ awareness and their ten - dency to build their own sense of responsibility for transformative action in their own specific professional environment. Some of these environments seem disappointing, some inspiring, but they all have the same underlying need for stronger support and coordination of the system. The present study is not without limitations. It was conducted on an ap - propriate, unequal sample of 66 primary and 32 secondary EFL teachers. Con - ducting broader research with equal samples of participants is recommended, but also within the same level of the education system. Some limitations also arose due to the absence of a question about the total number of students in the participants’ school, which meant that observations about the appropriate size of the SST and the profile of its members could not be made. The last limita - tion we would like to mention is that some of the questions about adjustments were simply too broad, or perhaps not entirely suitable, even for a qualitative questionnaire. Despite its limitations, the present study could be a solid starting point for further research on a specific category of SWD in order to formulate more specific guidelines. As already mentioned, focusing solely on EFL teachers working in schools with incomplete teams without education-rehabilitation experts would also be beneficial. In addition, future lines of research may also consider additional techniques of an exploratory research design, such as in - terviews or focus groups, since there was no possibility to set additional ques - tions, especially when the teachers’ opinions diverged (e.g., readiness to work with students with intellectual disabilities). The techniques of a correlational research design could also be considered. Based primarily on a mostly qualita - tive questionnaire, the present research effectively filled the identified research gap and laid solid groundwork for the aforementioned possible directions. teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 16 References Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers’ attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17 (2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250210129056 Batarelo Kokić, I., Vukelić, A., & Ljubić, M. (2010). Mapping policies and practices for the preparation of teachers for inclusive education in contexts of social and cultural diversity: Country report Croatia. European Training Foundation. https://www.etf.europa.eu/sites/default/files/m/E83FABD1C - F05816EC12579C9003A8C74_NOTE85VD9Y .pdf Benko, R., & Martinović, A. (2021). Inclusive education in English foreign language classrooms. Strani jezici: časopis za primijenjenu lingvistiku, 50(1), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.22210/strjez/50-1/5 de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2011). Regular primary schoolteachers’ attitudes towards inclu- Regular primary schoolteachers’ attitudes towards inclu - sive education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education , 15(3), 331–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110903030089 Bouillet, D. (2013). Some aspects of collaboration in inclusive education – teachers’ experiences. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 3 (2), 93–117. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.241 Bouillet, D. (2019). Inkluzivno obrazovanje: odabrane teme [Inclusive education: Selected topics]. Faculty of Teacher Education, University of Zagreb. Bouillet, D., & Bukvić, Z. (2015). Differences in the opinions of students and employed teachers on the educational inclusion of pupils with disabilities. Croatian Review of Rehabilitation Research, 51(1), 9–23. Bouillet, D., Domović, V ., & Ivančević, S. (2017). Beliefs about inclusive practices among students of teacher education and in-service teachers. Croatian Review of Rehabilitation Research, 53(2), 32–56. https://doi.org/10.31299/hrri.53.2.3 Braun, V ., & Clarke, V . (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Sage. Braun, V ., Clarke, V ., Boulton, E., Davey, L., & McEvoy, C. (2020). The online survey as a qualitative research tool. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 24 (6), 641–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1805550 Brod, M., Tesler, L. E., & Christensen, T. L. (2009). Qualitative research and content validity: De - veloping best practices based on science and experience. Quality of Life Research, 18(9), 1263-1278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9540-9 Domagała-Zyśk. E., & Podlewska, A. (2019). Strategies of oral communication of deaf and hard- of-hearing (D/HH) non-native English users. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 34( 2), 156–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1581399 Domović, V ., Vizek Vidović, V ., & Bouillet, D. (2017) Student teachers’ beliefs about the teacher’s role in inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 32 (2), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2016.1194571 Državni zavod za statistiku Republike Hrvatske. (2023). Osnovne škole, kraj šk. g. 2021 2021./2022. i početak šk. g. 2022./2023 [Primary School, End of 2021/2022 and Beginning of 2022/2023]. c e p s Journal 17 https://podaci.dzs.hr/media/fb2nszmy/obr-2023-2-1-osnovne-%C5%A1kole-kraj-%C5%A1k-g-2021- _2022-i-po%C4%8Detak-%C5%A1k-g-2022-_2023.pdf Eurydice. (2023). Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe: 2023 edition. Education, Audio - visual and Culture Executive Agency. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2797/529032 Fišer, Z. (2018). How and how much do I know about dyslexia? Self-evaluation of students of teacher training studies at Faculty of Education at University of Josip Juraj Strossmayer in Osijek. In E. Rogulj, A. Višnjić Jevtić, & A. Jurčević-Lozančić (Eds.), Early childhood relationships: The foundation for a sustainable future (pp. 88–97). OMEP Croatia. http://omep.hr/assets/zbornik.pdf Fišer, Z. (2019). Competence of Croatian pre- and in-service teachers of foreign languages in teaching students with dyslexia. [Doctoral thesis, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sci - ences]. Fišer, Z. (2020). Multisensory, direct and structured teaching of a student with special educational needs: A case study. Odgojno-obrazovne teme, 3(5), 83–102. Fišer, Z., & Dumančić, D. (2014). How do I ‘unjumbel’ this? Study of EFL teachers’ competences and preferences in teaching students with dyslexia. In S. Letica Krevelj, & J. Djigunović Mihaljević (Eds.), UZRT 2014: Empirical studies in applied linguistics (pp. 20–31). FF Press. Florian, L. (2014). What counts as evidence of inclusive education? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 29(3), 286–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2014.933551 García-Pastor. M. D., & Miller, R. (2019) Unveiling the needs of students who stutter in the language skills – A study on anxiety and stuttering in EFL learning. European Journal of Special Needs Educa - tion, 34(2), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1581400 Hay, J. F., Smit, J., & Paulsen, M. (2001). Teacher preparedness for inclusive education. South African Journal of Education, 21 (4), 213–218. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/saje/article/view/24905 Hernández-Torrano, D., Somerton, M., & Helmer, J. (2022). Mapping research on inclusive education since Salamanca Statement: A bibliometric review of the literature over 25 years. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(9), 893–912. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1747555 Jordan, A., Schwartz, E., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2009). Preparing teachers for inclusive class - rooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(4), 535–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.010 Kahn‐Horwitz, J. (2015). Organizing the mess in my mind: EFL teachers’ perceptions and knowledge of English orthography. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 28 , 611–631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9541-8 Kałdonek-Crnjaković, A., & Fišer, Z. (2017). ‘Dyslexia-friendly’ approaches in the teaching practice of Croatian English as a foreign language (EFL) teacher. In S. Letica Krevelj, & R. Geld (Eds.), UZRT 2016: Empirical studies in applied linguistics (pp. 139–149). FF Press. https://doi.org/10.17234/UZRT.2016.12 Kałdonek-Crnjaković, A., & Fišer, Z. (2021a). Teacher positioning and students with dyslexia: Voices of Croatian EFL teachers. Journal of Language and Education, 7 (3), 76–88. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2021.11561 Kałdonek-Crnjaković, A., & Fišer, Z. (2021b). Disleksija u nastavi engleskoga kao stranog jezika [Dys- teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 18 lexia in teaching English as a foreign language]. Alfa. Karamatić-Brčić, M., & Viljac, T. (2018). Teacher attitudes towards inclusive upbringing and educa - tion. Magistra Iadertina, 13(1), 92–104. Kranjčec Mlinarić, J., Žic Ralić, A., & Lisak, N. (2016). Teachers’ reflections on the challenges and barriers for integration of students with disabilities. Školski vjesnik: Journal for Pedagogic Theory and Practice, 65, 233–247. Kudek Mirošević, J., & Bukvić, Z. (2017). Differences in the provision of individualised educational support to students in different grades. Croatian Review of Rehabilitation Research, 53(Supplement), 265–277. Kudek Mirošević, J., & Jurčević Lozančić, A. (2014). Attitudes of educators and teachers regarding the implementation of inclusion in regular preschools and primary schools. The Croatian Review of Rehabilitation Research, 50(2), 17–29. Liontou, T. (2019). Foreign language learning for children with ADHD: Evidence from a technology- enhanced learning environment. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 34 (2), 220-235. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1581403 Martan, V . (2018). A review of research about inclusive education from perspectives of teachers and teacher students. Školski vjesnik: Journal for Pedagogic Theory and Practice, 67(2), 265–284. Martan, V ., Skočić Mihić, S., & Matošević, A. (2017). Teachers’ attitudes toward teaching dyslexic students. Croatian Journal of Education, 19 (Sp.Ed.3), 75–97. https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v19i0.2704 McCutchen, D., Green, L., Abbott, R. D., & Sanders, E. A. (2009). Further evidence for teacher knowledge: Supporting struggling readers in grades three through five. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22(4) , 401–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-009-9163-0 McHatton, P . A., & McCray, E. (2007). Inclination toward inclusion: Perceptions of elementary and secondary education teacher candidates. Action in Teacher Education, 29(3), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2007.10463457 Messiou, K. (2017). Research in the field of inclusive education: Time for a rethink? International journal of inclusive education, 21(2), 146–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2016.1223184 Ministry of Science, Education and Y outh, Republic of Croatia. (2022). Školski e-Rudnik [School e- Mine]. https://mzo.gov.hr/ser-skolski-e-rudnik-3419/3419 Nijakowska, J. (2014). Dyslexia in the European EFL teacher training context. In Pawlak, M. & Aronin, L. (Eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism (pp. 129–154). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01414-2_8 Nijakowska, J. (2019). Foreign language teachers’ preparedness to cater for special educational needs of learners with dyslexia: A conceptual framework. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 34(2), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2019.1581401 Nikčević-Milković, A., Jurković, D., & Durdov, J. (2019). Estimate of implementation of educational inclusion by primary school teachers and high school teachers. Croatian Journal of Education, 21 (2), 599–638. https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v21i2.3107 Nilholm, C. (2021). Research about inclusive education in 2020 – How can we improve our theories c e p s Journal 19 in order to change practice?. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 36 (3), 358–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2020.1754547 Nilholm, C., & Göransson, K. (2017). What is meant by inclusion? An analysis of European and North American journal articles with high impact. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 32(3), 437–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2017.1295638 Official Gazette. (2008a). Zakon o odgoju i obrazovanju u osnovnoj i srednjoj školi [Primary and Secondary School Education Act]. Narodne novine: službeni list Republike Hrvatske. https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2008_07_87_2789.html Official Gazette. (2008b). Državni pedagoški standard osnovnoškolskog sustava odgoja i obrazovanja [National pedagogical standard of the primary school education system]. Narodne novine: službeni list Republike Hrvatske. https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2008_06_63_2129.html Official Gazette. (2014). Pravilnik o tjednim radnim obvezama učitelja i stručnih suradnika u osnovnoj školi [Regulation on the weekly duties of teachers and school support team members in primary school]. Narodne novine: službeni list Republike Hrvatske. https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2014_03_34_613.html Official Gazette. (2015). Pravilnik o osnovnoškolskom i srednjoškolskom odgoju i obrazovanju učenika s teškoćama u razvoju [Regulation on Primary and Secondary Education of Students with Develop - mental Disabilities]. Narodne novine: službeni list Republike Hrvatske. https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2015_03_24_510.html Official Gazette. (2021). Nacionalni plan izjednačavanja mogućnosti za osobe s invaliditetom za raz- doblje od 2021. do 2027. godine [National Plan for the Equalisation of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities from 2021 to 2027]. Narodne novine: službeni list Republike Hrvatske. https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2021_12_143_2440.html Portelli, J. P ., & Koneeny, P . (2018). Inclusive education: Beyond popular discourses. International Journal of Emotional Education, 10 (1), 133–144. Reinke, K., & Moseley, C. (2002). The effects of teacher education on elementary and secondary pre - service teachers’ beliefs about integration: A longitudinal study. Action in Teacher Education, 24(1), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2002.10463265 Saloviita, T. (2020). Attitudes of teachers towards inclusive education in Finland. Scandinavian Jour - nal of Educational Research, 64(2), 270–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2018.1541819 Skočić Mihić, S. (2017). Učiteljska osposobljenost za izvedbu individualizirane nastave u inkuzivnim razredima. [Teacher training for the implementation of individualised teaching in inclusive classes]. In R. Čepić, & J. Kalin (Eds.), Profesionalni razvoj učitelja: status, ličnost i transverzalne kompeten- cije [Professional development of teachers: Status, personality and transversal competences] (pp. 139–156). Faculty of Teacher Education in Rijeka. Skočić Mihić, S., Gabrić, I., & Bošković, S. (2016). Teachers’ beliefs about the values of inclusive education. The Croatian Review of Rehabilitation Research, 52(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.31299/hrri.52.1.3 Spratt, J., & Florian, L. (2013). Applying the principles of inclusive pedagogy in initial teacher educa - teaching english as a foreign language to students with disabilities in the ... 20 tion: From university-based course to classroom action. Revista de Investigación en Educación, 11(3), 133–140. Švegar, D., Borbelj Čeko, J., Krulić Kuzman, K., Rogić, M., Viduka, D., Bijelić, M., Zelić, I., Zrilić, A., Jakšić, I., Tumpić, J., Daraboš,, D., Paušak,, B., Zgodić, S., & Sušanj, I. (2020). Stručni suradnici u osnovnoškolskom sustavu RH: elaborat. [School support team members in the primary school system in the Republic of Croatia: Elaboration]. Psihološko proljeće. UNESCO. (1990). World Declaration on Education for All and framework for action to meet basic learning needs. UNESCO. UNESCO. (1994). Salamanca statement and framework for action for special needs education. UNESCO. Valenta, A. K. (2018). Rano učenje engleskog kao stranog jezika kod djece s posebnim potrebama. [Early learning of English as a foreign language in children with special needs] [Master’s thesis, Univer - sity of Split, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences]. DABAR Digital Academic Archives and Repositories. Wilhelmy, A., Hertel, G., & Köhler, T. (2022). Qualitative methods for studying age and work 1. In Zacher, H. & Rudolph, C. W . (Eds.), Age and work: Advances in theory, methods, and practice (pp. 202-218). Routledge. Zagona, A. L., Kurth, J. A., & Macfarland, S. Z. C. (2017). Teachers’ views of their preparation for inclusive education and collaboration. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 40(3), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406417692969 Žero, A., & Pižorn, K. (2022). Undergraduate and graduate students’ beliefs about dyslexia: Implications for initial foreign language teacher education. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 12 (4), 101–127. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1432 Žic Ralić, A., Cvitković, D., Żyta, A., & Ćwirynkało, K. (2020). The quality of inclusive education from the perspective of teachers in Poland and Croatia. The Croatian Review of Rehabilitation Re- search, 56(2), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.31299/hrri.56.2.6 c e p s Journal 21 Biographical note Ana Blažević Simić, PhD, is an assistant professor at the Department of Pedagogy, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at the University of Zagreb. Her main research and teaching interests include inclusive pedagogy and education of students with disabilities. Anamaria Titijevski Vidović, MA, completed the university grad - uate double major study programme in English language and literature with emphasis on teaching and pedagogy at the University of Zagreb, Faculty of Hu - manities and social sciences. She is currently employed as a school support team member – a pedagogue, in a primary school.