The overall aim of the research presented here is to examine challenges in the special needs support tradition and the consequences of these challenges with the aim of increasing knowledge regarding the opportunities and constraints that are created as partof the support. In addition, the overarching study aims to highlight issues of democracyand inclusion in the social practices that are focused here and in what manner theseemerge and are framed. These aims are examined through three separate studies. The first study theoretically examines the central concepts of democracy and inclusionin school policy. The central query here relates to what possible consequences differentmodels of democracy imply vis-à-vis inclusive processes and what possibilities exist forchallenging traditions in special need education? Tradition has often been recognized asan important factor for compensating individuals in a reactive and segregating way. The second study takes an ethnographic point of departure and focuses five languagepre-schools that are instituted with the primary aim of teaching Swedish to children fromhomes where Swedish is not spoken. The institutional intention is to prepare these pupilsfor inclusion in future school arenas. One query here relates to what types ofconsequences such a proactively conceptualized activity gives rise to? A case-study that focuses the analysis of a course to prepare teachers for writingremedial plans constitutes the third research foci. The course is offered by a national stateauthority, the older Institute of Special Education (Specialpedagogiska institutet). Theactivity of working on remedial plans is a challenge for the special educational traditionand its individualization of school related problems. A central issue here relates to whatconsequence such a challenge gives rise to when it is formulated by a school-authority? The results of the studies presented in this thesis indicate that traditions resist changeeven though there is an ambition to challenge these. Old patterns of providing support ininstitutional arenas are difficult to reshape. In both empirical studies individual deficits isa common understanding of school-problems. The results of the empirical studies are alsodiscussed in relation to the conceptual analysis presented in the first article.