**5. Conclusion**

Individuals or groups express and satisfy different needs even though they function in the environment under the same conditions as others. The environment also represents a demand towards humans regarding a sustainable approach. Let us start from the premise that people and groups have different directions for life. In that case, the purpose is not to provide everything to everyone but to obtain adequate help and create opportunities and opportunities to lead a dignified life. We consider how to conduct an individual in an educational environment so that he understands the sequence of contexts, accepting and including the conditions of his growth, active participation in processes, the value of the individual's uniqueness, the space of a common third, the type of approach and relationships between people. Here, we view the connected concepts of Buber's dialogue and Freire's liberating pedagogy, marginally supplementing the connection with the mediating tool – digital technologies. We specify the idea of dialogue and its position in environments more closely from the aspect of the educational environment. We present dialogue-based learning and transformational processes in the educational environment related to dialogue. We also deal with dialogue and its connections with inclusion. We offer a universal model of a logical procedure for positive change in society, within which it is possible to

identify the presence of attributes that direct people towards a common goal – degree of participation, method of communication, and cooperation. We bring closer the dialogic and inclusive approach and their interconnected principles based on which inclusion can subsequently be introduced; we further focus on dialogue as a tool that can be used to answer questions regarding the introduction of inclusion while we, after that, identify and specify these in education in terms of content, performance, framework, evaluation, regulation level. As a result of inclusion in the educational environment, we supplement the competencies of an inclusive culture and work in society to transform social programs and services in general. We compare the evidence-based program and services with the personalised service from a dialogue perspective and present a possible consensus.
