The traditionalism-inclusionism controversy in special education : a conceptual analysis

The aim of this study has been to challenge or expand the present views on special education. In a series of six articles this thesis will directly or indirectly debate questions relating to inclusive and exclusive mechanisms in society. It is claimed that the tension between traditionalism and inclusionism within special education may harm the legitimation of special education as a profession of the welfare state. The articles address the relationship between these two approaches. The traditionalism-inclusionism controversy is partly rooted in different ways of understanding the role of special education with respect to democracy. It seems, however, that the traditionalism-inclusionism controversy tends to lead researchers to debate paradigmatic positions with each other than to develop alternative strategies for dealing with the delicate challenge of the differences within education. ---- There are three major areas of this discussion. The first part presents the theory of research programmes as a way of describing the content, the possibilities, and the problems of the different approaches. The main argument is that the concept of research programmes more clearly emphasizes the ethical responsibilities involved in research within the field of special education than does the paradigmatic approach. The second part considers the social aspects of the debate between traditionalism and inclusionism from different perspectives. A central claim made is that the work seen within special education must be understood as a reaction to the social and political world that the profession is part of, and that this also is part of a specific historical development. Even though it is possible to claim that the main aim for special education is to help people that are looked at as disabled or feel disabled, it is also necessary to understand that the profession is highly constrained by the grand narrative of the welfare state and the historical discourse that this profession is part of. The third part focuses on a central aspect of special education: the humanistic solutions towards people who are left behind by ordinary education. The humanistic obligation for special education is part of the general aim of the welfare state to provide an education for a democratic and an inclusive society. This humanistic aim and the goal to offer an education for democracy seem therefore, to dominate the understanding of how special education works.

The aim of this study has been to challenge or expand the present views on special education. In a series of six articles this thesis will directly or indirectly debate questions relating to inclusive and exclusive mechanisms in society. It is claimed that the tension between traditionalism and inclusionism within special education may harm the legitimation of special education as a profession of the welfare state. The articles address the relationship between these two approaches. The traditionalism-inclusionism controversy is partly rooted in different ways of understanding the role of special education with respect to democracy. It seems, however, that the traditionalism-inclusionism controversy tends to lead researchers to debate paradigmatic positions with each other than to develop alternative strategies for dealing with the delicate challenge of the differences within education. --- There are three major areas of this discussion. The first part presents the theory of research programmes as a way of describing the content, the possibilities, and the problems of the different approaches. The main argument is that the concept of research programmes more clearly emphasizes the ethical responsibilities involved in research within the field of special education than does the paradigmatic approach. The second part considers the social aspects of the debate between traditionalism and inclusionism from different perspectives. A central claim made is that the work seen within special education must be understood as a reaction to the social and political world that the profession is part of, and that this also is part of a specific historical development. Even though it is possible to claim that the main aim for special education is to help people that are looked at as disabled or feel disabled, it is also necessary to understand that the profession is highly constrained by the grand narrative of the welfare state and the historical discourse that this profession is part of. The third part focuses on a central aspect of special education: the humanistic solutions towards people who are left behind by ordinary education. The humanistic obligation for special education is part of the general aim of the welfare state to provide an education for a democratic and an inclusive society. This humanistic aim and the goal to offer an education for democracy seem therefore, to dominate the understanding of how special education works.