The central issue of this article is the coordination between special and general education in curriculum planning for pupils with special educational needs. The focus is on individual education plans (IEPs) in special education and work plans in general education. This is also viewed in relation to how special and general education teachers cooperate on planning. The analysis is based on a qualitative interview study with special and general education teachers in four primary and lower secondary schools in two municipalities. A clear pattern is shown in the study, where curriculum planning for special and general education is not very coordinated and cooperation between special and general education teachers is often very limited. Thus, curriculum planning within special and general education appears to be more separated than coordinated. The two groups of teachers appear to adopt traditional and partly separate roles, and tend to plan individually rather than together. Responsibility for the education of pupils with special needs seems to be more divided than shared.
ARTICLE HISTORY
The purpose of the article is to study the development of educational policy in Norway in the field of the unitary school system and to analyse whether the development can be seen as a move towards increasing inclusion. The educational policy, when seen over a long time span, has progressively aimed towards the development of a common compulsory school that has embraced increasingly more groups, across social and geographical divides. At the same time, the development has been characterised by discord and tensions, e.g. between standardisation and differentiation, coordination and special arrangements and organisational and pedagogical differentiation. Gradually, it was stressed that as many pupils as possible should be allowed to live and grow up at home and that special education was to be coordinated with the ordinary school as much as possible. Later on, inclusive education has been clearly formulated as a principle of education. It did assume a broadening of responsibility for the ordinary schools in order to develop an educational programme that can accommodate the diverse learning needs of all pupils. It is pointed out that the policy of the unitary school has to deal with a lot of critical dilemmas for moving further towards inclusion.
The central issue of this article is teachers' experiences with the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) in primary and lower secondary schools, both in terms of the teachers' own challenges and the situation of the pupils. The study is based on semi-structured interviews with general and special education teachers in four local schools in Norway. The results indicate a limited degree of cooperation and coordination between general and special education. This in turn means a lack of adequate adaptation and an academic standardisation of the general education, which reduces the potential to meet the needs of pupils with SEN.Teachers find that pupils with SEN have a greater tendency than other pupils to fall by the wayside and be left to their own devices when participating in general education. It particularly seems to affect pupils who are quiet and withdrawn. Teachers point out their challenging work situation with a large number of pupils to follow up, which can lead to them not having enough time for and not giving enough attention to those pupils who need additional support.
The main theme of this article is teachers' experiences of how joint reflection and common follow-up practices impact on the development of inclusive education. The study was conducted using an adapted letter method, where the teachers at one school in Norway answered some open questions by discussing and formulating a joint text. The results suggest that the teachers, who have previously participated in a national programme of school development, seem to have developed a broad understanding of inclusive education that entails meeting the diversity of needs of all pupils. They do not only consider inclusion to be a matter of placement, but also something that involves a social and an academic communality. One important finding is that joint reflection in a sharing culture engenders common frames of reference for the practical actions of inclusion. Teachers' own experiences suggest that joint discussion and reflection also play a central role in the efforts aimed at the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs.
NorwayThis article analyses and discusses the development of the principles of adapted teaching and inclusive education in the three most recent Norwegian national curricula, seen in light of curriculum potential as an overarching perspective. This potential highlights teachers' opportunities for choosing and adapting their teaching content. The area of problems is first related to relevant curriculum theory and choice of method. Our qualitative text analyses and then examines the relevant curricula and other national documents which provide guides and intentions for schooling in Norway. The analysis will also be viewed in an international perspective in relation to OECD evaluations of Norwegian schooling. The discussion highlights the fact that the Norwegian curriculum reforms are affected by these international evaluations. This particularly applies to the relationship between the central governing of the school's content and the individual school's curriculum potential.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.