Vai al contenuto


HomeResults ▹ Questionnaire

Questionnaire: how inclusive is my school?

The SYLLABUS was developed in three work steps: 1. a questionnaire constructed starting from the Index items and administered to teachers, school staff, students and families; 2. a competence grid, outlining the areas and skills of the inclusive teacher; the syllabus, developed on the basis of the competence grid, in which competences, indicators and descriptors are articulated.

The Questionnaire had the following purposes: involve teachers, staff, students, families in the inclusion process initiated by the project; analyse the level of inclusion of the school perceived by the different actors; identify strengths and weaknesses and priorities to be pursued for inclusion; identify the areas of expertise to be developed in the syllabus. 

Working approach

The questionnaires were built on the basis of the questionnaires contained in the last part of the Index for Inclusion. The index, in fact, contains ready-made questionnaire formats to be administered to school staff, families and students. Starting from this basis, the partnership of the ALL IN SCHOOL project has prepared 4 different questionnaire formats to be administered to the intended targets (school staff, parents and students). Each school had the task of reaching the following target groups: 20 Teachers/trainers; 10 School not teaching staff; 20 Students; 10 Parents / families.

There are two questionnaire formats for students contained in the Index: one for primary and secondary school students, one for kindergarten children.

In consideration of the difference in level between primary and secondary students, and since the partnership schools welcome students of different levels (see table 1), it was decided to prepare a questionnaire format for students of the ISCED1 level and a questionnaire format for ISCED2/3 students.

For teaching staff and non-teaching staff of the schools it was decided to administer a single questionnaire format, as suggested in the Index. The questionnaire formats developed are shown in the following table:

To develop the questionnaires, it was decided to divide the partnership staff into two working groups, each of which prepared two questionnaire formats, which they subsequently shared with all the others. Each partner then translated the four questionnaire formats from English into their own language, and published the questionnaire online to administer it remotely to the intended target.

The work on developing the questionnaires took into account the following issues:

  • The items had to be necessarily reduced in number: the examples provided in the index, in fact, contain a very high number of items (from 55 to 70) that cover all the dimensions of the Index. To ensure that all respondents answered all questions, it was decided to reduce the number of items to 20 for adults and 10 for students, respectively. The items deemed most appropriate for the purposes of the project were therefore selected.
  • It was necessary to contextualize the items for the age level of the students, thus adapting the language and the type of questions for the chosen levels.

A three-level metric was used for the responses to the questionnaire: agree/always; sometimes/can’t say; disagree/never.



A total of 884 questionnaires were administered in the period February-April 2021 in the five partner countries. Overall, the students are the most critical, with an “always” response average of 67% for ISCED 1 and 70% for ISCED 2/3 respectively; the average response “always for adults, on the other hand, is around 80%.

For the analysis of the questionnaires, the items whose answers denote the greatest critical issues were identified:

  • low number of answers in the “always” level
  • presence of a significant number of responses in the “sometimes” level
  • presence of a number of responses in the “never” level.

These items, in which the users’ view is not entirely satisfactory, reveal a need which has an impact on the educational organization of the school, the competences of teachers and the inclusive approach of the entire educational community.

The identification of these critical issues, to which correspond needs not completely satisfied, supports us in identifying the inclusive skills that should be part of the teacher’s set of competences. The items referring to sustainability issues or to school organization in general were excluded from the analysis.

ISCED1 students: critical issues

A1. I can’t wait to come to school every day.Children don’t like going to school
A2. Children are kind to each other at school.Children are not kind to each other at school
A5. Children often help each other in lessons.Children don’t help each other
A6. If I have a problem I can ask an adult for help.Children who have a problem don’t turn to adults for help
A7. At school I learn about people in other parts of the world. Other cultures are not learned at school
A8. Teachers are interested in listening to my ideas.Teachers are not interested in listening to children’s ideas
A9. Teachers don’t mind if I make mistakes in my work as long as I try my best.Children’s mistakes are penalized regardless of their effort
A10. My work is displayed on the walls of the school / is shared on the screen.The children’s works are not enhanced through the display in the school

ISCED2/3 students: critical issues

B1. Students collaborate and support each other.There is no collaboration and mutual support between the students
B2. The school encourages democratic involvement to support inclusion.Democratic participation in school is not encouraged
B3. Each student has the opportunity to share his/her own ideas in the recognition of rights and democracy.Students do not have the opportunity to express their ideas in the recognition of rights and democracy.
B7. Critical thinking is encouraged.Critical thinking is discouraged
B8. Students are aware of their educational progress.Students are not informed of their progress
B9. The school fosters cooperative learning.The school discourages cooperative learning
B10. Extra-curricular practices foster free involvement concerned with the students’ interest.Extra-curricular practices do not allow free involvement concerned with the students’ interest.

Teachers and school staff: critical issues

C1. The school staff are involved in a democratic collaboration.There is a lack of democratic collaboration in the school staff
C2. The school staff and the families are involved in a democratic collaboration.There is a lack of democratic collaboration between school staff and families
C4. The school encourages mutual support.The school discourages mutual support
C5. The school fosters collaboration with the community it belongs to in order to provide a shared developmentThere is no collaboration that favors a shared development between the school and the community
C9. The school encourages leadership by inclusive processes.The school discourages leadership by inclusive processes
C10. The staff competences are thoroughly identified and involved.The staff competences are not identified and involved
C12. The school coordinates the supporting practices.The school does not effectively coordinate support practices
C13. Training practices allow the school staff to enhance student’s values.School staff can’t enhance student’s values because specific training is lacking
C15. The school fosters critical thinking.The school discourages critical thinking
C18. The school staff are involved in the educational, planning and assessing process.The school staff are excluded from the educational, planning and assessing process
C19. The school staff shares resources shaped for the educational process.The resources produced for the educational processes are not shared by the school staff
C20. The carers support students’ learning process and involvement.The carers do not support students’ learning process and involvement.

Parents and families: critical issues

D1. The school keeps me informed of what’s going on.Parents and families are not adequately informed of what is happening at school
D2. Students get on well together.Students don’t get along
D3. Adults and young people get on well together.Students and adults don’t get along
D6. It’s good to have students from different backgrounds in the school.Having students from different backgrounds is a bad thing
D14. At school people do not look down on students because of what they wear.Students at school are discriminated against for how they dress
D15. If anyone bullied my son I know that I would get help from the school.Families are not helped by school if their children are bullied
D17. I think the teachers are fair when they punish a student.Teachers are not fair in punishing students
D18. My son learns how to settle disagreements by listening, talking and compromise.Students in school do not learn to settle disputes by listening, talking and compromise
D19. The school has a good system for supporting students when they have a problem.The school does not have an efficient system for supporting students with problems
D20. The students help each other when they are stuck with their work.Students don’t help each other when they have problems with studying