AbstractDue to widening participation in higher education, so-called språkverkstäder (academic writing centers) have been founded and are now present at most of the larger Swedish universities. The main activity at writing centers are individual tutorials in academic writing, reading and study skills. At most of the writing centers, tutors also give lectures and workshops in general academics, sometimes in cooperation with the university teachers at the departments. The aim of this study is to broaden the knowledge about a group of tutors who work with students in study difficulties in extended tutorials. Research questions are asked about what jurisdiction the tutors have over the professional work with the students, both in the individual tutorials and in other work tasks at the writing centers. Through interviews with eight tutors, data were collected and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Based on the theoretical approach of critical pragmatism, democratic goals like inclusion of all, are associated with the tutors’ descriptions of what in this study is regarded as a special educational work at the academic writing centers. As an analytical and interpretive frame categorial and relational perspectives together with Abbott’s theory about jurisdictional control over expert labor are used. The result shows that the tutors’ claim over their professional work with students in study difficulties vary. The jurisdictional claim depends upon the tutors’ educational background, on how the area of work and knowledge are defined and on how it is described, understood and negotiated by other professionals at the university. In the struggle about who should do what to whom the students in study difficulties are at risk to becoming invisible. Further, the jurisdiction depends upon how the tutors perceives their democratic mission within the reality of widening participation. Overall, the result shows a weak jurisdiction for the tutors at the academic writing center regarding their work with students in study difficulties. The study draws the conclusions that work with students in study difficulties needs more attention at writing centers, and that tutors need more knowledge about teaching a diverse student body with different learning realities. In this context, special educational expertise and special educational perspectives can be of use for the development of both writing center practice and theory. Futhermore, a professionalization of the writing tutor work is crucial for writing centers in order to contribute to the inclusion work in higher education and truly become a writing center for all. Finally, the question of support for students in study difficulties needs to be regarded as a matter for all professions in higher education.

This thesis has two overarching aims. The first is to generate further knowledge about Swedish independent schools, specifically regarding the organisation and provision of special support and how these relate to special educational traditions and inclusive education. This is conducted through four empirical studies, utilising data gathered in two total population survey studies. The first survey was a total population study of Swedish independent compulsory schools (N = 686, response rate = 79%), and results from this study are presented in articles I, II and IV. Article III presents results derived from a total population survey of special pedagogues (SENCOs) and special education teachers in Sweden educated according to the degree ordinances of 2001, 2007 and 2008 (N = 4252, response rate = 75%). Article I contains a general description of special education issues in the total population of independent schools. Article II continues with comparisons of these issues in different groups of independent compulsory schools. Article III studies differences in organisational prioritisations regarding special support and special educators in municipal and independent schools. Finally, article IV presents qualitative content analysis of over 400 responses regarding special support at independent schools. The second overarching aim of the thesis is to further develop the discussions initiated in the articles about how special education and inclusive education can be understood in light of the education reforms that introduced the independent schools. A critical theoretical analysis and contextualization of the empirical results from the articles is conducted to explain and describe the consequences of the new (market) education paradigm. Results show that, generally, the independent schools have not challenged special educational traditions to a significant degree. Rather, traditional conceptions, explanations and organisational measures are reproduced, and in some cases enhanced, by market mechanisms. However, there are great differences between the different types of schools with regard to both their perspectives on special education and their organisational approaches. There are also indications that the principle of choice is limited for this pupil group as compared to some other groups. Additionally, the increasing clustering of pupils in need of special support at certain schools replicates a system with special schools. In this case, market mechanisms are contributing to a system that is in contradiction to the idea of an inclusive school system. The theoretical interpretation of the results suggests that Skrtic’s theory can largely explain the empirical patterns found. However, his theory gives rise to different predictions or potential scenarios depending on what parts of his theory are underscored. Moreover, his theory must be complemented with additional perspectives to more fully account for diversity within the results, particularly as the results indicate that discourses/paradigms of special education and inclusive education often occur simultaneously and can thus be seen as expressions of practices taking place in a complex social and political environment. Keywords: Special education; inclusion; school choice; education reform; independent schools; compulso-ry schools; pupils in need of special support, SENCOs; special education teachers; critical pragmatism; Thomas M. Skrtic / Denna avhandling har två övergripande syften. Först, att generera kunskaper om fristående grundskolor i Sverige, specifikt vad gäller organisation och tillhandahållande av särskilt stöd, samt hur det kan förstås i ljuset av specialpedagogiska traditioner och inkludering. Fyra empiriska studier presenteras med data från två stora forskningsprojekt. Det ena var en totalpopulations undersökning av fristående grundskolor (N=686, respons=79 %), resultat från den presenteras i artikel I, II och IV. Artikel III presenterar resultat från en totalpopulations undersökning av specialpedagoger och speciallärare i Sverige, utbildade enligt examensförordningarna från 2001, 2007 och 2008 (N=4252, respons: 75 %). Artikel I beskriver specialpedagogiska frågor inom hela populationen av fristående skolor i generella termer. Artikel II gör jämförelser mellan olika grupper av fristående skolor, artikel III beskriver skillnader i specialpedagogisk organisation mellan fristående och kommunala skolor i termer av specialpedagogers och speciallärares anställningssituation och artikel IV presenterar resultat av en kvalitativ innehållsanalys av över 400 svar om särskilt stöd i fristående skolor. Det andra övergripande syftet är att utveckla den teoretiska diskussionen som initierades i artiklarna, om hur specialpedagogik och inkludering kan förstås i ljuset av de utbildningsreformer som presenterade skolval och fristående skolor i Sverige. En kritisk teoretisk analys och kontextualisering av de empiriska resultaten från artiklarna genomförs för att förklara och beskriva konsekvenserna av de nya (marknads) paradigmet inom svensk utbildning. Resultaten visar att de fristående skolorna inte har utmanat specialpedagogiska traditioner i någon högre grad generellt. Traditionella synsätt, förklaringar och organisatoriska lösningar reproduceras, till och med förstärks, av marknadsmekanismer. Däremot så är det stora skillnader mellan olika skolor, både vad gäller specialpedagogiska perspektiv och organisatoriska lösningar. Det finns också tecken på att skolvalet kan vara begränsat när det gäller elever i behov av särskilt stöd. Dessutom riskerar en samling av elever i behov av särskilt stöd på vissa skolor att reproducera ett system med specialskolor, något som inte är i linje med ambitioner för ett inkluderande skolsystem. De teoretiska tolkningarna av resultaten visar att Skrtic’s teoretiska verktyg kan till en hög grad förklara de empiriska resultaten. Däremot kan olika scenarier skapas beroende på vilka delar av hans teorier som betonas. Dessutom behöver hans teorier kompletteras med tilläggsperspektiv för att förklara variationen i resultaten. Nyckelord: Specialpedagogik; inkludering; skolval; utbildningsreformer; fristående skolor; grundskolan; elever i behov av särskilt stöd, specialpedagoger; speciallärare; kritisk pragmatism, Thomas M. Skrtic / Fristående skolors arbete med elever i behov av särskilt stöd / Speciella yrken? – om speciallärares och specialpedagogers arbete och utbildning