Journal of Inclusive Educational Research

Stakeholder Attitudes and Their Impact on Inclusive Early Childhood Education for Children with Disabilities in Zimbabwe

Esther Musengi — 2026-06-30

Stakeholder attitudes constitute a critical determinant of inclusive education outcomes, shaping whether children with disabilities are welcomed or rejected, supported or neglected, included or excluded within educational settings. Yet limited research has examined attitude dynamics within early childhood development (ECD) settings in sub-Saharan Africa, where cultural beliefs about disability may generate distinctive attitudinal patterns. This study investigated the extent to which stakeholder attitudes affect the inclusion of children with disabilities in ECD centres within Zimbabwean primary schools, examining attitudes across multiple stakeholder groups and the mechanisms through which attitudes translate into inclusion or exclusion. Employing a convergent parallel mixed-methods design, data were collected from 12 school-heads, 36 school-teachers, and 24 parents of children with disabilities through structured questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analysed using chi-square tests, while qualitative data underwent thematic analysis within Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory framework. Findings revealed statistically significant associations between stakeholder attitudes and inclusive education outcomes (school-heads: χ²=64.67, p<0.01; teachers: χ²=64.55, p<0.01). Positive attitudes were associated with enhanced inclusion through increased learning opportunities, motivation, and stakeholder support. Negative attitudes manifested as exclusionary enrolment decisions, discrimination against specific disabilities (epilepsy, hearing impairment), and reduced participation by children with disabilities. Parents identified teachers' fears about epilepsy contagion and discomfort with sign language as specific attitudinal barriers. The study revealed attitude dynamics across multiple stakeholder groups: teachers, school-heads, parents of children with disabilities, parents of non-disabled children, non-disabled peers, and government. Stakeholder attitudes fundamentally shape inclusive education for children with disabilities in ECD settings, operating through complex interactions across ecological systems. Attitudinal change requires multi-level interventions targeting knowledge gaps, cultural beliefs, and systemic support structures. The disability-specific pattern of attitudes (particularly regarding epilepsy and hearing impairment) indicates need for targeted interventions addressing particular misconceptions and skill gaps. Zimbabwe's inclusive education framework should incorporate comprehensive attitude-change strategies, including disability awareness programmes, pre-service and in-service training on attitudinal barriers, community engagement initiatives addressing cultural misconceptions about disability, and specific interventions targeting epilepsy and hearing impairment.

Designing the future:Resposible AI in Education

Sheenu Sharma — 2026-06-30

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a field of study that combines the applications of machine learning, algorithm productions, and natural language processing. Applications of AI transform the tools of education. AI has a variety of educational applications, such as personalized learning platforms to promote students’ learning, automated assessment systems to aid teachers, and facial recognition systems to generate insights about learners’ behaviours. Despite the potential benefits of AI to support students’ learning experiences and teachers’ practices, the ethical and societal drawbacks of these systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts. The rapid integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into educational systems has transformed teaching, learning, and administrative processes. While AI offers significant opportunities to enhance personalization, accessibility, and efficiency, it also raises ethical, social, and pedagogical concerns. This paper (1) explores the concept of responsible AI adoption in education; (2) briefly defines AI through the concepts of machine learning and algorithms; (3) emphasizing fairness, transparency, accountability, data privacy, and inclusivity; and (4) describes ethical challenges and dilemmas of using AI in education [1]. By examining current applications, challenges, and governance frameworks, the study proposes strategic recommendations for designing an ethical and sustainable AI-driven educational future.

Keywords: Responsible AI, Education Technology, Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, Digital Learning

Leading Through Uncertainty: Inclusive and Ethical Postdigital Leadership for AI-Enabled Higher Education

Ebba Ossiannilsson — 2026-06-30

Global education is being reshaped by converging disruptions, including climate pressures, geopolitical uncertainty, and rapid advances in generative artificial intelligence, aligned with international agendas for sustainable and inclusive development. These dynamics are transforming higher education into complex, datafied, and platformised ecosystems that are not only technological but also epistemic and ethical. This paper advances a conceptual leadership framework for AI-enabled higher education, grounded in postdigital and sociomaterial perspectives. It introduces an extended conceptual leadership framework for inclusive and ethical AI integration in higher education – the “Three Cs” leadership framework: Care, Curiosity, and Challenge – reinterpreted through the lens of human–AI co-agency and responsible AI governance, grounded in postdigital and sociomaterial perspectives. The Three Cs are presented as a model for navigating complexity and ensuring equity, accessibility, and human-centred values in AI-enabled environments. By integrating theoretical insights with practical implications, the framework offers guidance for inclusive and ethical AI implementation and helps bridge the gap between technological adoption and leadership practice. The contribution of this chapter is primarily conceptual, normative, and position-based, rather than empirically grounded.