How Boundary-Crossing Learning Empowers Special Education Teachers’ Inclusive Professional Development: From Isolated Practitioner to Collaborative Professional Identity

Abstract

Purpose: The deepening of inclusive education requires special education teachers (SETs) to break through long-standing “professional isolation” and reconstruct inclusive professional competence through interdisciplinary and cross-site collaboration. Yet the process and underlying mechanism by which teachers transform from “isolated practitioners” to “collaborative professionals” remain insufficiently revealed. Grounded in Lave and Wenger’s situated learning theory (legitimate peripheral participation) and Akkerman and Bakker’s boundary-crossing framework, this study investigates the developmental trajectory and reshaping mechanism of SETs’ inclusive professional competence and professional identity after participating in boundary-crossing learning.

Methods: A mixed-qualitative design was adopted. Phase 1 employed semi-structured interviews with 22 in-service SETs to construct a dimensional framework of “boundary-crossing learning → inclusive professional competence.” Phase 2 adopted a multi-case study design, tracing three SETs who deeply participated in boundary-crossing projects for 10 months. Data sources included 2–3 in-depth interviews per participant (60–90 minutes each), 120 hours of participatory observation, and project documents (reflective journals, co-lesson plans, IEPs, collaboration records). Data were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis.

Results: The isolated-practice dilemmas of SETs manifested in four core problems: a single-discipline knowledge structure, closed teaching mindset, insufficient collaborative interaction, and solidified practical experience. Boundary-crossing learning comprised four dimensions—disciplinary, role, team, and reflective crossing—which reshaped five competencies: inclusive learning assessment, differentiated curriculum adaptation, inclusive classroom implementation, multi-agent collaborative education, and inclusive instructional innovation. Professional identity transformation followed three intertwined trajectories: (a) expanding collaborative networks from “working alone” to “cross-boundary dialogue”; (b) reconstructing teaching practice from “discipline-based” to “co-created inclusion”; and (c) transforming collaborative identity from “passive executor” to “change agent.” Legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) and the creative use of boundary objects were the core mechanisms of this transformation.

Conclusion: Boundary-crossing learning is not merely a knowledge-acquisition channel but a profound identity-reshaping practice. The essence of “empowerment” lies in enhancing teachers’ self-efficacy in inclusive teaching through mastery and vicarious experiences, thereby driving them from isolated practitioners to collaborative professionals. This study provides process-oriented empirical evidence for SET professional development in the context of inclusive education.