Evaluating inclusive education services: a configurational analysis of capacity and implementation conditions

This study evaluates inclusive education services by testing whether capacity–context configurations reveal heterogeneity overlooked by linear models. Survey data from 242 special education teachers were analysed using a 24-item instrument; negatively worded context items were reverse-scored and effectiveness was treated as perceived. Regression explained 55.6% of variance, with professional capacity significant and supportive context non-significant. Comparison of two- through seven-profile solutions supported five profiles (BIC = 1182.747; entropy = .868). Two profiles showed comparably high perceived effectiveness despite contrasting contexts: coordinated (very high capacity–supportive context; M = 4.641) and compensatory (very high capacity–constrained context; M = 4.660). Games–Howell tests found no difference between them, while both exceeded the remaining profiles. Overall profile differences were large, F(4, 237) = 67.023, p < .001, η² = .531. Configurational evaluation therefore reveals service heterogeneity that average net effects can obscure.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Educational Research and Evaluation
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2026.2747079
Primary Topic
Collaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating inclusive education services: a configurational analysis of capacity and implementation conditions

Amka Amka, Muhammad Fathoni
Educational Research and Evaluation
Collaborative Teaching and Inclusion
article

Evaluating inclusive education services: a configurational analysis of capacity and implementation conditions

Amka Amka, Muhammad Fathoni
article en

Abstract

This study evaluates inclusive education services by testing whether capacity–context configurations reveal heterogeneity overlooked by linear models. Survey data from 242 special education teachers were analysed using a 24-item instrument; negatively worded context items were reverse-scored and effectiveness was treated as perceived. Regression explained 55.6% of variance, with professional capacity significant and supportive context non-significant. Comparison of two- through seven-profile solutions supported five profiles (BIC = 1182.747; entropy = .868). Two profiles showed comparably high perceived effectiveness despite contrasting contexts: coordinated (very high capacity–supportive context; M = 4.641) and compensatory (very high capacity–constrained context; M = 4.660). Games–Howell tests found no difference between them, while both exceeded the remaining profiles. Overall profile differences were large, F(4, 237) = 67.023, p < .001, η² = .531. Configurational evaluation therefore reveals service heterogeneity that average net effects can obscure.

Educational Research and Evaluation
Lambung Mangkurat University (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Collaborative Teaching and Inclusion
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.