Abstract
The concept of “full inclusion” is that students with special needs can and should be educated in the same settings as their normally developing peers with appropriate support services, rather than being placed in special education classrooms or schools. According to advocates the benefits of full inclusion are increased expectations by teachers, behavioral modeling of normally developing peers, more learning, and greater selfesteem. Although the notion of full inclusion has appeal, especially for parents concerned about their children's rights, there is very little empirical evidence for this approach, especially as it relates to children with autism. This manuscript addresses the literature on full inclusion and its applicability for students with autism. Although the goals and values underlying full inclusion are laudable, neither the research literature nor thoughtful analysis of the nature of autism supports elimination of smaller, highly structured learning environments for some students with autism.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Carlberg, C., & Kavale, K. (1980). The efficacy of special versus regular class placement for exceptional children: A meta-analysis.Journal of Special Education, 14, 295–309.
Harris, S., Handleman, J., Kristoff, B., Bass, L., & Gordon, R. (1990). Changes in language development among autistic and peer children in segregated and integrated preschool settings.Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 20, 23–31.
Hoyson, M., Jamieson, B., & Strain, P. (1984). Individualized group instruction of normally developing and autistic-like children: The LEAP curriculum model.Journal of the Division for Early Childhood, 8, 157–172.
Kaufman, J. M., & Hallahan, D. P. (1995).The illusion of full inclusion. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Madden, N., & Slavin, R. (1983). Mainstreaming students with mild handicaps: Academic and social outcomes.Review of Educational Research, 53, 519–569.
Mesibov, G. B., Schopler, E., & Hearsey, K. A. (1994). Structured teaching. In E. Schopler & G. B. Mesibov (Eds.),Behavioral issues in autism (pp. 195–207). New York: Plenum Press.
Myles, B., Simpson, R., Ormsbee, C. & Erickson, C. (1993). Integrating preschool children with autism with their normally developing peers: Research findings and best practices recommendations.FOCUS on Autistic Behavior, 8, 1–20.
Ottensbacher, K., & Cooper, H. (1984). The effect of class placement on the social adjustment of mentally retarded children.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 17, 1–14.
Schopler, E., Mesibov, G. B., & Hearsey, K. (1995). Structured teaching in the TEACCH system. In E. Schopler & E. B. Mesibov (Eds.),Learning and cognition in autism (pp. 243–268). New York: Plenum Press.
Strain, P. (1983). Generalization of autistic children's social behavior change: Effects of developmentally integrated and segregated settings.Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 3, 23–34.
Strain, P. (1984). Social interactions of handicapped preschoolers in developmentally integrated and segregated settings: A study of generalization effects. In T. Field, J. Roopharine, & M. Segal (Eds.),Friendships in normal and handicapped children (pp. 187–207). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Strain, P., Hoyson, M., & Jamieson, B. (1985). Normally developing preschoolers as intervention agents for autistic-like children: Effect on class deportment and social interaction.Journal of the Division for Early Childhood, 9, 105–115.
Strain, P. S., & Kerr, M. M. (1981).Mainstreaming of children in schools. New York: Academic Press.
Wang, M., & Baker, E. (1985–1986). Mainstreaming programs: Design features and effects.Journal of Special Education, 19, 503–521.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mesibov, G.B., Shea, V. Full inclusion and students with autism. J Autism Dev Disord 26, 337–346 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02172478
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02172478