Special education: does it help? A study of special education in Norwegian upper secondary schools

Abstract

Abstract In 1994 a comprehensive reform of upper secondary education was introduced in Norway, giving all 16-year-olds—including SEN students—a statutory right to enter upper secondary. In a longitudinal study following a representative group of SEN students through upper secondary from 1994 until 1999, the main findings were: (1) SEN students in special classes appear to achieve a lower level of success—measured by achievement of formal competence—than SEN students in ordinary classes, all other things being equal; and (2) an increase in the amount of special education for SEN students in ordinary classes appears to have a negative effect on the achievement of formal competence, all other things being equal. Following these findings, it may be concluded that special education in Norwegian upper secondary does not seem to fulfil its own ambition of reducing differences. Keywords: Special educationUpper secondary educationSEN studentsStudy competenceVocational competence Notes * Norwegian Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education (NIFU), Hegdehaugsveien 31, N-0352 Oslo, Norway. Email: eifred@nifu.no When working with problems associated with special education, the term 'ordinary student' soon appears. Comparisons are made between those who have special education together with ordinary students, those attending special classes with those attending ordinary classes, those admitted through special intake with those in ordinary intake, etc. The contrast is the ordinary with the unordinary. No one uses the terms unordinary student, unordinary classes or unordinary education; but perhaps many think along these lines, unconsciously. Perhaps this is a contributory factor that is so difficult to include, and so easy to segregate. When I use the term 'ordinary', this is because I am unable to find a more appropriate alternative. The project was carried out by the author at FAFO Institute for Applied Social Sciences in the period 1994–2000. It was financed by the Norwegian Research Council under the 'Programme for special educational knowledge and development'. The project is comprehensively described in Markussen (Citation2000), and has also been reported in an article in Norwegian (Markussen, Citation2001). Similarly, I could have estimated the probability of achieving study and/or vocational competence according to the variation in the other independent variables, but in this connection, I will just use the significance of the variation in class type. Additional informationNotes on contributorsEifred Markussen Footnote* * Norwegian Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education (NIFU), Hegdehaugsveien 31, N-0352 Oslo, Norway. Email: eifred@nifu.no