Purpose: The purpose of this study - as a part of “The National Strategic Research Program of Welfare”, which main emphasis is special needs education in the Danish schools - is to investigate the current special needs education of pupils with minor learning or social disabilities. The study includes identifying the logics, the construction of categories and dominating understandings that the teachers articulate in relation to creating a more including school. Theoretical and methodological framework: As part of the study, semi-structured qualitative interviews with teachers and leaders in eleven schools and analyses of documents and web-sides has been conducted. This part of the study, which focuses on teachers’ construction of meaning are based on Enesto Laclau’s Discourse Theory. Results: According to the interviewed teachers, pupils with learning disabilities can be included in the “normal classroom” but in order to preserve the children’s social lives. The teachers seem to put more emphasis on the pupils’ possibility of taking part in the social life of the “normal classroom” rather than to their educational progress. Simultaneously some of the teachers articulate that including these pupils could be at the expense of their educational progress. In relation to pupils with social disabilities special needs education should be offered and take place in special needs teams or by professionals special needs teachers, according to a majority of the interviewed teachers. Further, the children’s social difficulties make it necessary to exclude these pupils in order to secure their educational progress at the expense of account of their social life in the normal classroom. In general, the teachers do not seem to find it possible to include this category of children in the normal classes. In general, the teachers seem to construct at least two categories of children – the one with learning disabilities and the one with social disabilities. It seems obvious to the teachers to include the children with learning disabilities in order to preserve the children’s social life. Simultaneously, most of the teachers find it necessary to exclude the children with social disabilities in order to secure their educational progress as well as to secure the educational progress of the rest of the class. Conclusion According to the teachers: • The children with learning difficulties should be included in the classroom in order to preserve their social life • The teachers do not articulate inclusion as a better educational solution to these children’s educational progress than the traditional special needs education. On the contrary they articulate that inclusiveness could be at the expense of these pupils educational progress. • According to the teachers, creating a more inclusive school seems to be a social and pedagogical project rather than an educational project. References: Burr V. 1995:”An Introduction to Social Constructionism”, Routledge, London Hacking, I.1997:”On Being More Literal about Construction” in Irving Velady and Robin Hacking, I. 1999:”The Social Construction of What?” Harvard University Press Knorr-Cetina 1993:”Construction and Fiction: the Prospect of Constructionism in the Study of Science and beyond”, Danish Yearbook of Philosophy Kvale, S. 1996:”Interviews”, SAGE Publications Laclau, E. and C. Mouffe 1987:”Post-Marxism without Apologies”, New Left Review nr. 166 Laclau, E. 1990:”New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time”, Verso, London Laclau, E. 1993: “Discourse”, in R.E. Goordin and P. Petitt (red.): “A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy”, Blackwell, London Laclau, E. 1996: “Deconstruction, Pragmatism, Hegemony”, in C. Mouffe (red.): “Deconstruction and Pragmatism”, Routledge, London Laclau, E. 1996a: “Emancipation(s)”, Verso, London Latour B. 2000:”When Things Strike Back”, British Journal of Sociology, nr. 51 Rasmussen, J. 2002:”Textual Interpretation and Complexity – Radical Hermeneutics”, Paper at the American Educational Research Conference, USA

Theoretical and methodological framework: As part of the study, semi-structured qualitative interviews with teachers and leaders in eleven schools and analyses of documents and web-sides has been conducted. This part of the study, which focuses on teachers’ construction of meaning are based on Enesto Laclau’s Discourse Theory.

Results: According to the interviewed teachers, pupils with learning disabilities can be included in the “normal classroom” but in order to preserve the children’s social lives. The teachers seem to put more emphasis on the pupils’ possibility of taking part in the social life of the “normal classroom” rather than to their educational progress. Simultaneously some of the teachers articulate that including these pupils could be at the expense of their educational progress. In relation to pupils with social disabilities special needs education should be offered and take place in special needs teams or by professionals special needs teachers, according to a majority of the interviewed teachers. Further, the children’s social difficulties make it necessary to exclude these pupils in order to secure their educational progress at the expense of account of their social life in the normal classroom. In general, the teachers do not seem to find it possible to include this category of children in the normal classes. In general, the teachers seem to construct at least two categories of children – the one with learning disabilities and the one with social disabilities. It seems obvious to the teachers to include the children with learning disabilities in order to preserve the children’s social life. Simultaneously, most of the teachers find it necessary to exclude the children with social disabilities in order to secure their educational progress as well as to secure the educational progress of the rest of the class. Conclusion According to the teachers: • The children with learning difficulties should be included in the classroom in order to preserve their social life • The teachers do not articulate inclusion as a better educational solution to these children’s educational progress than the traditional special needs education. On the contrary they articulate that inclusiveness could be at the expense of these pupils educational progress. • According to the teachers, creating a more inclusive school seems to be a social and pedagogical project rather than an educational project.