Over the past decades, the proportion of children diagnosed with some kind of neuropsychiatric disorder, such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) or Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), has increased dramatically. The consequences of such a diagnosis for children vary. For instance, increasing numbers of children are put on medication (te Meerman et al. 2017). In many countries, there is a strategy of taking children with diagnoses out of the mainstream classroom thus placing them in special classes or even special schools. Behind such segregating tendencies, there is an assumption that children’s learning will improve when they are placed in a special class with few pupils, adapted teaching and continuous attention from one, sometimes even more than one, teacher. As has always been the case with special education, the idea is that by putting children in special environments, allegedly adapted to their capacities, and by providing individualised instruction, learning will improve and, as a consequence, children eventually will catch up and be able to return to a regular class. This compensatory idea rests on the assumption that the teaching that children are exposed to in such special educational settings will prepare them for a return to their regular classrooms and, in general, for a more successful educational career. The likelihood that children placed in such classrooms will ‘catch up’ with their classmates is debated, but it is clear that this is not always the case; rather they often will be ‘educated special needs pupils’ (Emanuelsson, 1986). But in practices of streaming, there is much at stake for society as well, whatever motives and arguments are used. Equity and equality of opportunity may be negatively affected. Children from lower socio-economic strata tend to end up in the lower streams, where the quality of teaching is often lower. Parental and teacher expectations on children’s capacities tend to be reduced when children are placed in special classes, as will the motivation for further education of the students themselves. Streaming may also have effects when it comes to gender (with boys being more likely to be taken out of mainstream classrooms), ethnicity and other factors (see Hallam and Parsons 2013). Also, international comparative research on educational performance tends to show that school systems that do not segregate students achieve better results.

中文翻译：

---

诊断及其教学意义——儿童的能动性和参与学校活动

在过去的几十年里，被诊断出患有某种神经精神疾病的儿童比例急剧增加，例如注意力缺陷多动障碍 (ADHD) 或自闭症谱系障碍 (ASD)。这种诊断对儿童的后果各不相同。例如，越来越多的儿童接受药物治疗（te Meerman 等人，2017 年）。在许多国家，有一种策略是将确诊儿童带出主流课堂，从而将他们安置在特殊班级甚至特殊学校。在这种隔离倾向的背后，有一种假设是，当孩子们被安排在一个学生人数很少、教学经过调整并得到一位（有时甚至不止一位）老师的持续关注的特殊班级时，他们的学习会得到改善。与以往的特殊教育一样，这个想法是，通过将儿童置于据称适合他们能力的特殊环境中，并通过提供个性化指导，学习将得到改善，因此，儿童最终会赶上并能够回到正常班级。这种补偿性想法基于这样一种假设，即儿童在这种特殊教育环境中接受的教学将使他们为重返正常课堂做好准备，并且总的来说，为更成功的教育生涯做好准备。被安置在这样的教室里的孩子“赶上”他们同学的可能性是有争议的，但很明显情况并非总是如此；相反，他们往往是“受过教育的特殊需要学生”（Emanuelsson，1986）。但是在流媒体的实践中，社会也有很多利害关系，无论使用何种动机和论据。公平和机会平等可能会受到负面影响。来自较低社会经济阶层的儿童往往会进入较低的阶层，那里的教学质量往往较低。当孩子被安排在特殊班级时，父母和老师对孩子能力的期望往往会降低，学生自己继续教育的动力也会降低。当涉及到性别（男孩更有可能被带出主流课堂）、种族和其他因素时，流媒体也可能会产生影响（见 Hallam 和 Parsons 2013）。此外，关于教育绩效的国际比较研究往往表明，不隔离学生的学校系统会取得更好的成绩。来自较低社会经济阶层的儿童往往会进入较低的阶层，那里的教学质量往往较低。当孩子被安排在特殊班级时，父母和老师对孩子能力的期望往往会降低，学生自己继续教育的动力也会降低。当涉及到性别（男孩更有可能被带出主流课堂）、种族和其他因素时，流媒体也可能会产生影响（见 Hallam 和 Parsons 2013）。此外，关于教育绩效的国际比较研究往往表明，不隔离学生的学校系统会取得更好的成绩。来自较低社会经济阶层的儿童往往会进入较低的阶层，那里的教学质量往往较低。当孩子被安排在特殊班级时，父母和老师对孩子能力的期望往往会降低，学生自己继续教育的动力也会降低。当涉及到性别（男孩更有可能被带出主流课堂）、种族和其他因素时，流媒体也可能会产生影响（见 Hallam 和 Parsons 2013）。此外，关于教育绩效的国际比较研究往往表明，不隔离学生的学校系统会取得更好的成绩。当孩子被安排在特殊班级时，父母和老师对孩子能力的期望往往会降低，学生自己继续教育的动力也会降低。当涉及到性别（男孩更有可能被带出主流课堂）、种族和其他因素时，流媒体也可能会产生影响（见 Hallam 和 Parsons 2013）。此外，关于教育绩效的国际比较研究往往表明，不隔离学生的学校系统会取得更好的成绩。当孩子被安排在特殊班级时，父母和老师对孩子能力的期望往往会降低，学生自己继续教育的动力也会降低。当涉及到性别（男孩更有可能被带出主流课堂）、种族和其他因素时，流媒体也可能会产生影响（见 Hallam 和 Parsons 2013）。此外，关于教育绩效的国际比较研究往往表明，不隔离学生的学校系统会取得更好的成绩。