Over the past decades, children and young people categorized as being a “special educational needs -pupil” has increased. Especially, the amount of neuropsychiatric diagnoses, such as for example ADHD, used as accounts of school failure, have dramatically increased. For example, it is estimated to affect about ”five million school-aged children” in USA (Rafalovich, 2005, p. 307) and in England there has been a ”700 % increase rate in the diagnosis of ADHD in children during the past ten years” (Lloyd, Stead, Cohen, 2006, p. 3).

This development challenges the politically prominent idea of having an inclusive school system as a platform for all children. The widespread use of neuropsychiatric diagnoses further implies that a growing number of children are diverted from mainstream education and placed in classes organised for children with special needs.

 The problem of how to handle children who do not fit into mainstream activities of institutionalised forms of schooling is as old as public schooling itself. The comprehensive school-system including children with diverse backgrounds may have problems with pupils performing poor in school who are construed as lacking certain prerequisites at the intellectual or social level. Discussions about how to handle such groups have a long history.Historical evidence indicates that the social and intellectual authorities that supply explanations and solutions vary over time.Different diagnoses, rooted in social, ethnic, and scientific categories, have been used over the years. At present, neuropsychiatric diagnoses like ADHD, ASD, Tourette, and others are frequently used. Although heavily debated, these categories, have a considerable impact on the discussion of learning difficulties and on the use of resources in schools. The introduction of special classes or even special schools for children with these diagnoses signify the impact of this diagnostic tradition, and its consequences for ideologies, identities of children (and professionals) and the use of material resources.

 Thus, the intention of having an inclusive school for everyone, when transformed into practice, results in fundamental dilemmas about inclusion and exclusion of children with different kinds of abilities and backgrounds. However, segregating solutions will not only have consequences for the idea of a having a school for all but, equally importantly, it will also have a decisive influence on children’s and young people’s identity, learning and development.

 The contributors of this symposium relate their research findings to these issues and focus on the educational strategies teachers consider relevant when organizing teaching- and learning practices for children considered to be in need of special services.  The presenters origin from Finland, Australia and Sweden.

 In particular, the contributors are engaged in an analysis of  a) the frequency of special teaching groups or special classes b) how the teaching – and learning practices in special units are organised concrete in order to offer special services c) what trajectories can be observed and how do these change over time? d) what considerations are shown towards pupils individual prerequisites and needs? and e) what pupil identities are developed in these settings?

 Lloyd, G., Stead, J. & Cohen, D. (2006). Critical new perspectives on ADHD, Oxford:  Routledge

Rafalovich, A. (2005). Exploring clinician uncertainty in the diagnosis and treatment of ADHD. Sociology of Health and Illness 27(3). 305-323.