Inclusion and equity in education are intentions that are central within education systems and policies across nations (cf. Brussino, 2020; Soriano et al., 2017). When OECD presented their intentions for future skills in 2030, inclusive education was described as a key aspect of educational policies (OECD, 2018), and there are projects such as Financing Policies for Inclusive Education System [FPIES] that work to ensure inclusive and equal education in European countries (European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, 2018). Thus, international education policies are concerned with special education to create inclusive and equal education for all.

In a similar way, Norway emphasizes special education to create an inclusive and higher quality education (White Paper 6 (2019-2020)). The report Inclusive community for children and youth stated more pupils need special education and that those receiving it do not achieve adequate educational output (Nordahl et al., 2018). Therefore, the report calls for a new policy within special education in Norway, emphasizing that special education should take place within the classroom community, involve teachers with relevant competencies, and an Educational and Psychological Counselling Service [EPS] integrated within the school system (Nordahl et al., 2018).  As a result, a new Education Act was implemented in Norway in 2024 (Education Act, 2024).

In the new Education Act, the concept of special education has been changed and replaced with three new concepts; Individually adapted education [IAE], physical adaptation [PhA] and personal assistance [PA] (Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training, 2024a, 2024b). This change removes the word ‘special education’ and divide it into three new and distinct concepts. Bernstein (1990) explains that the specialty of a discourse or an agent is preserved through the isolation between the categories. Therefore, Bernstein (1990) argues that to strengthen a category, it has to strengthen its specialty, and to weaken a category, it has to make the specialty less prominent. This paper inquires the specialty of special education in the new Education Act through comparing it with the previous version of the Education Act (Education Act, 1998). The following research question is raised in this paper: How is the school's role described when it applies to special education in the former and new Education Act in Norway?

To investigate the specialty of a category, Bernstein (1990, 2000) created a descriptive language through the concept of classification. Bernstein (2000) argues that “… dominant power relations establish boundaries, that is, relationship between boundaries, relationships between categories” (p. 6). Therefore, to investigate these power relations Bernstein developed the concept of classification. In this paper, the power relations that creates the boundaries between the school’s role in relation to special education is investigated through the classification principles. A strong classification implies a strong insulation between the categories, with each category having its own voices and rules (Bernstein, 2000). A weak classification implies that the categories have a weaker insultation and less prominent voices and rules (Bernstein, 2000). Therefore, investigating what creates the insulation between agents and discourses in the school system, as described in the Education Act, could reveal relations of power and control within special education. In this way, Bernstein’s theory provides an appropriate framework to investigate the school’s role within special education.

Bernstein (1990) describes four functions within the classification principles that regulate the insulation to a category. These principles are Extra-discourse relations of education, Intra-discourse relations of education, Transmission context and System context (Bernstein, 1990, s. 27). In this paper, these four principles are used to develop an analytical framework to inquire special education within the former and new Education Act. Since the Education Act is given by the state, the system context is investigated through the three other classification principles. These three categories are used to develop the analytical framework and will be further described. Bernstein (1990) describes that the first principle, the extra-discourse relations of education could be used to describe how the non-educational discourse is related to the educational discourse. In this paper, this category is used to describe the parents’ role in relation to the school context within special education. Further, Bernstein (1990) describes that the second principle, the intra-discourse relations of education could be concerned with relations (between agents and/or discourses) within the educational discourse. In this paper, this category involves relations between agents involved in special education, such as the Educational-psychological service and the municipality, and how these agents are involved in how special education takes form within the school context. The third principle, transmission context, argues Bernstein (1990), could be concerned with how the knowledge is transformed within the school context. In this paper, this category involves the pupil’s own role in how special education takes form in the classroom and school context. Additionally, to be able to understand the internal relations within the three discourses, Fairclough’s analytical perspective on textual analysis is utilized as a supportive analytical concept (Fairclough, 2003). Data material in this paper is the former and new Education Act. The former Education Act has a separate paragraph, §5, that is named Special education (Education Act, 1998). In the new Education Act, special education is removed as a concept and the new paragraph, §11, is called Adapted training and individual facilitation (Education Act, 2024, our translation). In the previous Education Act, adapted training and Intensive training were described in two separate paragraphs (§1-3, §1-4). However, in the new Education Act, they are included in §11. Therefore, §1-3, §1-4 and §5 from the former Education Act are included as data material, while §11 is included from the new Education Act.

The preliminary results indicate that there are discursive shifts within the new Education Act. In the extra-discourse relations of education, there is a strengthening in the classification value as the parents can no longer claim examinations regarding special education, and their possibility to be engaged in the pupil’s special education is reduced. This strengthening is also evident through the change in concepts, where special education is divided into the three new concepts, further reducing the parents’ possibility to intervene in the pupil’s special education. However, there is also a weakening in the classification value, as the pupils and parents are still described to be an active part in the preparation and evaluation of the pupil’s special education. In the intra-discourse relations of education, there is a strengthening in the classification value through a more detailed role descriptions of partners and agents (Educational-psychological service, municipality and school) in the new Education Act. However, there is a weakening in the classification value as the Educational-psychological service is now to a larger degree described as an advising and active partner in special education, and the municipality is described as having increased responsibility for special education in schools. In the transmission context, there is a strengthening in the classification value as the municipality and the Educational-psychological service are given more responsibility in how special education takes form in the classroom and school context. At the same time, pupils are described to a lesser degree as an active partner in how special education takes form in the classroom, and they are sorted into different categories through dividing special education into three new concepts. Based on these preliminary results, this paper discusses the school’s opportunities to create an inclusive and equal education for all pupils.

Bernstein, B. (1990). Class, Codes and Control. Volume IV. The structuring of pedagogic discourse. Routledge. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. Theory, research, critique. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Brussino, O. (2020). Mapping policy approaches and practices for the inclusion of students with special education needs. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 227, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/600fbad5-en Education Act (1998). Lov om grunnskolen og den vidaregåande opplæringa [The Education Act for Primary and Secondary Education] (LOV-1998-07-17-61). Norwegian Legal Information System. https://lovdata.no/dokument/NLO/lov/1998-07-17-61 Education Act (2024). Lov om grunnskoleopplæringa og den vidaregåande opplæringa [The Education Act for Primary and Secondary Education] (LOV-2023-06-09-30). Norwegian Legal Information System. https://lovdata.no/dokument/LTI/lov/2023-06-09-30 European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education (2018). Financing Policies for Inclusive education system. Policy Guidance Framework. https://www.european-agency.org/sites/default/files/fpies_policy_guidance_framework.pdf Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse. Textual analysis for social research. Routledge. Meld. St. 6 (2019-2020). Tett på – tidlig innsats og inkluderende fellesskap i barnehage, skole og SFO [Close to – Early Intervention and Inclusive Community in Kindergarten, School, and After-School Programs]. Ministry of Education and Research. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-6-20192020/id2677025/ Nordahl, T. at al. (2018). Inkluderende fellesskap for barn og unge. Ekspertgruppen for barn og unge med behov for særskilt tilrettelegging [Inclusive Community for Children and Youth. Expert Group for Children and Youth with Special Needs]. Report to the Ministry of Education and Research. https://files.nettsteder.regjeringen.no/wpuploads01/blogs.dir/215/files/2018/04/INKLUDERENDE-FELLESSKAP-FOR-BARN-OG-UNGE-til-publisering-04.04.18.pdf Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training (2024a, 24. April). Ord og omgrep i opplæringslova [Words and concepts in the Education Act]. Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. https://www.udir.no/regelverk-og-tilsyn/skole-og-opplaring/ny-opplaringslov/ord-og-omgrep/ Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training (2024b, 18. March). Tilpasset opplæring og individuell tilrettelegging i ny opplæringslov [Adapted education and individual adaption in new education act]. Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. https://www.udir.no/regelverk-og-tilsyn/skole-og-opplaring/ny-opplaringslov/hva-er-nytt-i-ny-opplaringslov/tilpasset-opplaring-og-individuell-tilrettelegging-i-ny-opplaringslov/ OECD (2018). The future of education and skills. Education 2030. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2018/06/the-future-of-education-and-skills_5424dd26/54ac7020-en.pdf Soriano, V., Watkins, A. and Ebersold, S. (2017). Inclusive education for learners with disabilities. Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union, European Parliament. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2861/14468