In Germany, the definition of special educational needs was developed by special education teachers by the end of 19^th century (Garz et al., 2022). Since then, the formal process of detecting and defining special educational needs has not changed significantly since the focus still remains on the characteristics of the pupil rather than on the characteristics of the teaching. In addition, special education has expanded both nationally and internationally, both in terms of professionals and schools: In Germany, the proportion of special needs pubils in each age group has risen from around1 % in 1900 up to now 8 % today (Dietze, 2019; Moser, 2023). This has been characterised as an “extension of the disability zone” (Felkendorff, 2003) as well as an effect of the “SEN industry” (Tomlinson, 2012), which continuously privileges dominant interests of stratification. Being labelled with special educational needs is closely linked to processes of social exclusion in mainstream classrooms as well as in special schools (Tomlinson, 2012, 267ff; Slee, 2019), understood as an ‘uneven distribution of opportunities‘. The empirical research project “FePrax” (funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research 2021-2024) therefore focuses on the justification of this labelling process. The project involves researchers from the Goethe-University Frankfurt, the Humboldt University in Berlin and the Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education and conducted 50 case studies of special educational appraisals and connected counseling interviews with parents in 2022 und 2023.

The research project includes documentary analysis and expert interviews of regulations on the definition of special educational needs within 5 German states (Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Hesse, North Rhine-Westphalia), a content analysis (including machine learning methods) (Kuckartz, 2018) of 50 written special educational appraisals, and a content analysis of 50 counselling interviews with parents. The analysis was guided by a research-based deductive category system. The framework for data analysis was the ‘chain of reasoning’ approach (Gläser & Laudel, 2009).

Based on 50 case studies, the process of defining special educational needs within a network of mainstream and special education teachers, local schoolboards and parents could be reconstructed as a mixed, but non-transparent agenda of management reasoning (e.g. Cook et al., 2023) and pedagogical counselling (Anastasov & Ristevska, 2019). Overall management and bureaucratic logics seem to dominate this process, which is critical under a power perspective. Also with regard to the long-term consequences, the diagnostic criteria are not always reliable, neither from a pedagogical nor from a psychological point of view. These findings will be embedded in similar research, e.g. the Austrian study „Evaluierung der Vergabepraxis des sonderpädagogischen Förderbedarfs (SPF) in Österreich“ (Gasteiger-Klicpera et al. 2023), and finally will be implemented in a power-critical discussion about social change within the inclusion agenda.

Anastasov, B. & Ristevska, M. (2019). The Role of the Counselor in the Pedagogical Counseling Process, DOI: 10.20544/teacher.18.06, 54-59. Cook, D.A., Stephenson, C. R., Gruppen, L.D. & Durning, S.J. (2023). Management Reasoning: Empirical Determination of Key Features and a Conceptual Model. Acad Med. 2023 Jan 1;98(1):80-87. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000004810. Epub 2022 Dec 22. PMID: 35830267. Dietze, T. (2019). Die Entwicklung des Sonderschulwesens in den westdeutschen Ländern. Empfehlungen und Organisationsbedingungen Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt. Felkendorff, K. (2003). Ausweitung der Behinderungszone: Neuere Behinderungsbegriffe und ihre Folgen. In C. Cloerkes (Ed.), Wie man behindert wird (pp. 25-52). Heidelberg: Winter. Garz, J., Moser, V. & Frenz, S. (2022): From record keeping to a new knowledge regime: The special school pupil as a new pedagogical object in Prussia around 1900 Paedagogica Historica. DOI: 10.1080/00309230.2022.2119089. Gasteiger-Klicpera, B. et al. (2023). Evaluierung der Vergabepraxis des sonderpädagogischen Förderbedarfs (SPF) in Österreich. https://www.bmbwf.gv.at/dam/jcr:5e6b7a7b-606a-448e-b0ca-07a84f419b4d/spf_eval.pdf Gläser, J. & Laudel, G. (2009). Experteninterviews und·qualitative Inhaltsanalyse als Instrumente rekonstruierender Untersuchungen (3. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Kuckartz, U. (2018). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung (4. Aufl.). Weinheim: Beltz Juventa. https://content-select.com/de/portal/media/view/5aa7b788-bfd0-4912-a0df-6955b0dd2d03?forceauth=1 Moser, V. (2023). Profession, organization, and academic discipline. Differentiation of a special education science in Germany since 1900. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 55 (4). DOI: 10.1080/00220272.2023.2248213 Tomlinson, S. (1985) The Expansion of Special Education, Oxford Review of Education, 11:2, 157-165, DOI: 10.1080/0305498850110203 Tomlinson, S. (2012) The Irresistible Rise of the SEN Industry, Oxford Review of Education, 38(3), 267-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2012.692055