Full inclusion and students with autism.
Full inclusion is not a one-size-fits-all evidence-based choice—keep structured classrooms available and match the setting to the student.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Brinton et al. (1996) looked at every paper they could find on placing students with autism in general-education classrooms.
They wrote a narrative review, not a new experiment.
Their goal was to see if full inclusion had solid evidence behind it.
What they found
The team found almost no strong data showing that full inclusion helps students with autism.
They concluded that smaller, structured special-education rooms should stay on the IEP menu.
How this fits with other research
Odom et al. (2012) later argued the opposite. They said a well-built, evidence-based eclectic program can work inside an inclusive classroom.
Matson et al. (2008) surveyed principals and found that those who believed autistic students could succeed in general ed pushed for more inclusive placements.
Yet Stewart et al. (2018) mapped 84 school studies and showed most autism behavior interventions still happen in self-contained rooms, backing the 1996 call to keep those settings.
Watkins et al. (2015) offered a middle path. They showed peer-mediated social skills interventions help students with autism thrive in inclusive rooms, giving teams a tool the 1996 paper did not discuss.
Why it matters
You do not have to pick sides. Keep the small, structured classroom as an IEP option while you trial peer-mediated supports or other tools that make inclusion easier. Use data, not philosophy, to decide where each student learns best.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →List both a general-ed and a self-contained placement on the IEP draft, then add peer-mediated social goals as a low-risk inclusion test.
02At a glance
03Original 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 self-esteem. 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.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 1996 · doi:10.1007/BF02172478