What is Really Meant by Unclusion: a Teacher's Point of View



In Norwegian school inclusion of all students regardless of their functional features is a general principle of education. There is a general agreement on this principle, and we have largely managed to include students with special needs in regular classes. Most of special schools are closed. But the studies show that we still face a great deal of problems when it comes to the implementation of inclusion principle (NOU 2009/18). Inclusion implies that there should be a bridge between regular and special pedagogy in the form of adapted training. Therefore school practice should be seriously changed, so that the school is focused on the diversity of students and the uniqueness of each of them, and not only on the average student. At the same time, it is necessary to have a serious attitude to the fact that some students have severe and fatal health problems, and measures for their special needs implementation require special efforts. However, schools and teachers face a number of ethical, professional and organizational dilemmas related with inclusion and special needs that they often simply do not know what to do with. Another important problem is the fact that municipalities and counties which are responsible for schools do not follow the state legislation.

General Information

Keywords: inclusive school; inclusion; integration; segregation; adapted training; equal quality education; special education; special pedagogy; students with special educational needs, students’ diversity; effectiveness of learning; learning environment.

Journal rubric: Perspectives of Inclusive Education

Article type: scientific article

For citation: Ytterstad G. What is Really Meant by Unclusion: a Teacher's Point of View. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2011. Vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 41–49. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)


  1. Arnesen A-L. Det pedagogiske nærvær. Inklude­ring i møte med elevmangfold. 2004.
  2. Abstrakt forlag, Oslo, 2004.
  3. Emanuelson I. Integrering og konsek-vensar av integreringsideologien. I: Haug P. (red.) Spesial­pedagogiske utfordringar. Universi-etsforl-aget, Oslo, 1995.
  4. Engelsen B. U. og Karseth B. Læreplan for Kun­nskapsløftet – et endret kunnskapssyn? Norsk Pedagogisk Tidsskrift, 5, 2007. 404–415.
  5. Hargreaves Andy. Lærerarbeid og skolekultur. Ad notam Gyldendal AS, Oslo,1996.
  6. Haug P. Spesialundervisning i grunnskulen – grun­nlag, utvikling og innhald. Abstrakt forlag, Oslo, 1999.
  7. Haug P. Professor Peder Haugs kommentar til Stortingsmeldingen. Notabene, 2, 6. Tidsskrift utgitt av Statens råd for likestilling av funksjonshemmede. 2011.
  8. Morbech S. Subkulturer. Synsforum 2. 1999.
  9. NOU nr. 18. Rett tilring. Kunnskapsdeparte­mentet, Oslo, 2009.
  10. Stortingsmelding nr. 18. Læring og felles­skap. Kunnskapsdepartementet, Oslo, 2010– 2011.
  11. Ytterstad G. Inkludering av svaksynte elever i klassefellesskapet. Masteroppgave i spesialpeda­gogikk og tilpasset opplæring, Finnmark University College, Alta, 2010.

Information About the Authors

Gudrun Ytterstad, Master, Deputy Administrator of Association of the Blind, District of Tromso, Norway, Tromsø, Norway, e-mail: gudrun.ytterstad@tromsoskolen.no



Total: 14386
Previous month: 248
Current month: 130


Total: 1313
Previous month: 3
Current month: 5