Exploring inclusive education in times of COVID-19: An international comparison of German, Austrian and Portuguese teachers

With the start of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the global education system has a faced immense challenges and disruptions resulting in and the necessity for an immediate redesign of teaching and learning in the school context. Face-to-face classroom instruction had to be replaced by 'emergency remote teaching', requiring teacher to adapt their daily routines to a new and unprecedented educational reality. Researchers and policymakers worldwide have agreed that, despite the fact that efforts were made to immediately adapt to emergency remote teaching, disadvantaged and vulnerable students may be especially at risk in emergency remote teaching. Given the differences in schooling organization across countries during the COVID-19 pandemic it can be expected that teachers performed inclusive instructional practices significantly different. Against the unpredictable situation, cross-country research has been urgently required to provide data that could inform education policy. Thus, this study explored teachers' perceptions of supporting at risk students during the first COVID-19 school closures, as well as examining teachers' inclusive teaching practices in three countries: Germany, Austria and Portugal. ANOVA results revealed important country differences. In general, it appears that teachers in Germany and Austria reported to have implemented less practices to address vulnerable and at-risk students compared to Portuguese teachers. Implications of the results, as well as further lines of research are outlined.

Face-to-Face Versus Remote: Effects of an Intervention in Reading Fluency During COVID-19 Pandemic

Fluency is a central skill for successful reading. Research has provided evidence that systematic reading fluency interventions can be effective. However, research is scarce on the effects of interventions delivered remotely versus face-to-face. This study investigated the efficacy of a systematic and standardized intervention for promoting reading fluency in third-grade students (N = 207) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study had a pretest, posttest, and follow-up design, with two intervention groups (remote vs face-to-face) and a control group. The intervention groups experienced 20 intervention sessions (2 sessions per week), each lasting approximately 50 min. Word reading accuracy, text reading accuracy, and fluency were measured in the three rounds of assessment. In both intervention groups, all measures of reading showed gains from pretest to posttest. The results also suggested that the efficacy of the intervention was similar in the remote and face-to-face modalities. These findings highlight the relevance of systematic interventions in increasing reading fluency and support the use of remote interventions as an adequate alternative to face-to-face interventions.