Bildning för alla! - DiVA

From a different angle it is quite clear that a dual system is at play at different
levels, but the two systems are also to a large extent integrated with one another.
Anyway, this is a far cry from the challenge to the normal/special distinction formulated
by Haug (1998). The distinction of course becomes more visible when
viewing the segregated organizational solutions in the system, e.g. the special
program for children with intellectual disabilities. At the same time, there are
values expressed at different levels of the system that are compatible with Haug’s
(1998) conception. However, inclusive education is not a concept used in the
school law or ordinances or in the curriculum. It should also be made clear that it
is a hard task to analyze exactly what goals and values that are to be central in the
Swedish comprehensive schools, since so many goals and values are identified and
their relative importance are not spelled out clearly.
The independent schools are to a large extent part of the same system as the
municipal schools and it seems premature to draw the conclusion that special
needs are approached in fundamental different ways within independent schools.
However, independent schools in general have fewer children that are defined as
in need of special support.
So what is the future of “inclusive” education in Sweden? Any suggestions about
this matter are of course speculative. Moreover, we will not attempt to ground our
observations on firm empirical data. Rather, it is our observations as educational
researchers that will form the basis for this tentative part of the paper. We believe
that present Swedish educational policy could be understood as a result of two
tendencies. On the one hand, there is a striving backwards, to schooling “as it used
to be”. Tomas Englund (1993) has succinctly used the phrase “the paradise lost” in
order to characterize this aspect of the present educational policy. Maybe the most
notable aspect of this first tendency is the will to increase central control over the
educational system. The other tendency is to import solutions to educational problems
from abroad. The increased importance of accountability and choice can
be seen as emanating from this tendency. Interestingly, accountability in terms
of national comparisons was also part of the “old” school while choice is a more
modern invention and in its purest form connected to new public management
and the marketization of schooling.
So what are the consequences as regards inclusive education of these tendencies
in educational policies? The increased importance on knowledge goals and the
new and higher demands on eligibility for upper secondary education will probably
increase the number of children eligible for special support. Thus, it seems
reasonable to expect that labels will continue to be important in the Swedish
school system and that it might even become harder to celebrate differences. One
factor partly outside of the school context which will contribute to an increased
importance of labels is the neuropsychiatric movement (cf. Nilholm, submitted).
But how will this affect the number of segregated organizational solutions within
the system? This is a hard question to answer. However, one should keep in mind
that is it possible that an increased focus on individual difficulties will give rise to
more segregated solutions. An additional factor that might work in this direction
is the possibility of school choice which might have the consequence that children
in need of special support will tend to end up in the same schools. Maybe the most
170 • BilDning fÖr AllA!