Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01497.x

Effects of inclusion on the academic achievement

and adaptive behaviour of children with
intellectual disabilities
jir_1497

1..9

R. Sermier Dessemontet,1 G. Bless1 & D. Morin2

1 Department of Special Education, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland
2 Department of Psychology, University of Quebec in Montreal, Montreal, Canada

Abstract
Background While an extensive body of research
has examined the outcomes of inclusion for pupils
with special needs, in particular learning disabilities,
its effects on the development of children with
intellectual disabilities (ID) have been less explored.
As inclusive practices tend to be more common for
this group of children, it is important to acquire
more knowledge on this issue.
Methods A comparative study with an experimental group of 34 children with ID fully included in
general education classrooms with support, and a
control group of 34 comparable children in special
schools has been conducted. The progress accomplished by these two groups in their academic
achievement and adaptive behaviour has been compared over two school years.
Results Included children made slightly more
progress in literacy skills than children attending
special schools. No differences were found between
the progress of the two groups in mathematics and
adaptive behaviour.

Correspondence: Mrs Rachel Sermier Dessemontet, University of

Zrich, Institut fr Erziehungswissenschaft, Hirschengraben 48,
8001 Zrich, Switzerland (e-mail: rsermier@ife.uzh.ch).

Conclusions Inclusive education is an appropriate

educational option for primary pupils with ID who
require extensive support in school.
Keywords academic achievement, adaptive
behaviour, inclusive education, intellectual disability

Introduction
Education policies have been progressively shifting
towards inclusive education in many countries for
several years. However, there are great differences in
the implementation of inclusive education across
European nations (EADSNE 2003; OECD 2007;
Ferguson 2008). While some of them have developed broad inclusive practices, others still educate
most of the children with special needs in special
classes or special schools (EADSNE 2003; OECD
2007; Ferguson 2008). Switzerland figures among
the less inclusive countries in Western Europe
(Powell 2006; EADSNE 2008). In most provinces
of Switzerland, the majority of children with intellectual disabilities (ID) attend special schools.
Nevertheless, with the reorganisation of special education currently taking place in Switzerland, the
development of inclusive practices is now being
promoted (CDIP 2007). It is therefore likely that

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

2
R. Sermier Dessemontet et al. Effects of inclusion on children with ID

the inclusion of children with ID in general education classrooms will become a more common practice in Switzerland. Projects following this aim have
already been developed in recent years within some
provinces of the country (EADSNE 2003; Berger
2004). In this specific national context, as well as
with regards to international trends in favour of
inclusive education, it seems crucial to acquire
more empirical knowledge about the effects of
inclusion on the development of children with ID.
While the effects of inclusion on the academic
achievement of children with special needs have
been thoroughly investigated, this is not the case
regarding specifically children with ID (Freeman &
Alkin 2000; Bouck 2007; Hunt & McDonnell
2009). Only a few empirical studies have investigated the effects of inclusion on their academic
achievement.
In their research review, Freeman & Alkin (2000)
found nine empirical studies comparing the academic achievement of children with ID in special
schools or special classrooms, versus in general education classrooms. These studies find either that
there is no significant difference between the academic achievement of the two groups or that children in general education classrooms perform
better than their counterparts in separated settings.
Freeman & Alkin (2000) observe that a greater
amount of time spent in the general education
classroom, which varies between 25% and 100% of
the school time in the different studies, seems to
be associated with more positive results. It is important to take into account that half of the studies
included in this review were conducted before the
seventies. Meanwhile, the definition of intellectual
disability and inclusive practices have changed
(Gresham & Macmillan 1997; Lindsay 2007; Ruijs
& Peetsma 2009).
Some recent studies have investigated the effects
of inclusion on the academic achievement of children and teenagers with Down syndrome. Laws
et al. (2000) found that children in general education classrooms achieved significantly higher scores
in vocabulary and grammar comprehension. There
also were more students who had developed reading
skills among the included children than among the
children in special schools. Turner et al. (2008)
report data from three studies done with the same
cohort of persons. A path analysis approach was

used to investigate the predictors of the academic

outcomes at three different ages. They found that
the level of cognitive abilities was by far the most
significant predictor of the participants academic
achievement. Mainstream school attendance also
had a beneficial, but modest, effect on the academic
achievement throughout participants school
careers.
Two studies with bigger samples have examined
the effects of inclusion on the academic achievement of children with mild disabilities. Most of the
participants of these studies are children with
learning disabilities, but a proportion of them are
described as having mild ID. The first study, conducted by Peetsma et al. (2001), compared the
development of matched pairs of primary-aged
pupils in mainstream and special schools. After two
years, there was no difference in the progress made
by the two groups in their academic achievement.
However, after four years, the results reveal that
pupils educated in inclusive settings made significantly greater academic progress than their matched
pairs in special schools. The second study, from
Cole et al. (2004), compared the progress of pupils
with mild disabilities who had been fully included
in general education classrooms and pupils who had
been educated in pull-out resource programs. They
found no significant difference between the progress
made by the two groups in reading and mathematics during the course of one school year.
Beyond the acquisition of academic skills, the
development of adaptive skills also plays a crucial
role in maximising the independence of persons with
ID and their participation in the community (Dixon
2007; Kozma et al. 2009). Despite the importance of
adaptive behaviour, only a few studies have investigated the impact of inclusive education on the
development of these types of skills.
Saint-Laurent et al. (1993) found no difference
between the gains in adaptive behaviour of children
with moderate ID included in general education
classrooms or those attending special classrooms
after a period of two years. Cole & Meyer (1991)
also found no difference between the progress of
two groups of children with severe ID (included
and attending special classrooms) during two years.
In a similar study, Fischer & Meyer (2002) compared the progress of matched pairs of children
with severe ID. Their results indicate that the

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

3
R. Sermier Dessemontet et al. Effects of inclusion on children with ID

children in general education classrooms made significantly bigger gains in their adaptive behaviour
than their counterparts in special classrooms.
Buckley et al. (2006) compared the adaptive abilities
of teenagers with Down syndrome. They found no
difference in daily living skills or socialisation
between the scores of the two groups. However, the
included teenagers obtained significantly better
scores in communication and functional academic
skills than their counterparts attending special
schools. Finally, Hardiman et al. (2009), compared
the social adaptive skills of children with moderate
ID included in general education classrooms or
attending special schools. They found no difference
between the global social skills of these two groups.
In summary, we can conclude from previous
studies that inclusion seems to allow children with
ID to make either as much, or more, progress in
their academic achievement and adaptive behaviour
than separate educational settings. However, comparative studies about the outcomes of inclusion
are often hampered by methodological weaknesses
which invite some caution in the interpretation of
their results (Hegarty 1993; Farell 2000; Lindsay
2007). First, the comparability of the groups is
often insufficiently established (Hegarty 1993; Farell
2000; Myklebust 2007). Cognitive competencies are
not systematically controlled. The level of adaptive
behaviour and presence of associated impairments
are also controlled very rarely. If the comparability
of the two groups is not well established, there is
always the possibility that the better outcomes of
included children are not due to the placement but
to their better skills existing prior to school entry
(Hegarty 1993; Myklebust 2007; Foreman 2009). In
fact, studies have shown that children with higher
levels of functioning and particularly higher IQs are
more often included than children with lower levels
(Osborne et al. 1991; Buysse et al. 1994; Eaves &
Ho 1997; Harris & Handleman 2000; Wendelborg
& Tssebro 2008). This problem is often described
as participant bias (Hegarty 1993; Myklebust
2007). Second, these comparative studies often have
differing definitions of inclusive or separated education and very scarcely describe the conditions and
type of support provided in these two settings
(Farell 2000; Lindsay 2007). This information,
however, is crucial in order to provide a correct
interpretation of results. Finally, the samples of

these studies are very small (Lindsay 2007; Myklebust 2007). More than half of the studies cited by
Freeman & Alkin (2000), along with the more
recent studies described in this introduction, count
less than 20 included participants.
As a result of the lack of sufficient solid empirical
evidence on the effects of inclusion on academic
achievement and adaptive behaviour of children
with ID, more research on this topic is needed.
This study is an effort to address this issue while
avoiding the problem of participant bias. It aims
at answering the following research question: Do
children with ID who are fully included in general
education classrooms with support make as much
progress in their academic achievement and adaptive behaviour as similar children educated in
special schools?

Methods
Research design
A quasi-experimental study has been conducted in
order to investigate the effects of educational placement type (inclusion vs. special school) on childrens progress in their academic achievement and
adaptive behaviour. The academic achievement of
the participants has been assessed with an academic
achievement test three times over two school years
(November 2007, June 2008 and June 2009). Their
adaptive behaviour has been measured with the
Adaptive Behavior Assessment System Second
edition (Harrison & Oakland 2002), which was
completed by their parents and teachers in the
beginning and at the end of two school years
(November 2007 and June 2009).

Measures
The academic achievement test
The academic achievement of the participants has
been assessed with the LEst 47 (Moser et al. 2004)
and the LEst 69 (Moser & Bayer 2007), which
is its continuation. This standardised academic
achievement test was designed to measure the
progress of Swiss pupils during the preschool and
primary school years. This test was standardised
with a sample of 1000 Swiss children. It is con-

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

4
R. Sermier Dessemontet et al. Effects of inclusion on children with ID

structed on the basis of the Item-Response-Theory.

It measures literacy (phonological awareness,
reading, writing, grammar and vocabulary) and
mathematic skills (counting, knowing numbers,
ordering numbers, arithmetic and measures). The
test must be administered individually to a child.
The Adaptive Behavior System Second edition
The adaptive behaviour of the participants was
measured with the Adaptive Behavior Assessment
System Second edition, 5 to 20 years (ABAS-II)
(Harrison & Oakland 2002). The parent and the
teacher forms were used. The ABAS-II has good
psychometric properties (Rust & Wallace 2004; Frick
et al. 2010). Reliability coefficients for internal consistency, testretest and inter-rater reliability are
generally between 0.8 and 0.9 (Frick et al. 2010).
The ABAS-II has been described as having good
content validity, and the manual presents good evidence of convergent and divergent validity (Rust &
Wallace 2004; Frick et al. 2010). This scale was
translated using a committee approach. The average
internal consistency coefficients of these translated
forms suggest a good reliability (Cronbach alpha:
0.80.9).

Participants
Participants were recruited in five different provinces
in Switzerland through the centres providing support
for included children with ID and through special
schools for children with ID. In both settings, children were selected for participation if they met the
following criteria: they (1) were aged between 7 and
8 years; (2) had been diagnosed as having an intellectual disability; (3) had an IQ between 40 and 75;
and (4) lived at their parents home.
A total of 134 children met the studys criteria
and were given written parental consent to participate in the present study. Of these children, 55 were
included in general education classrooms, and 79
were attending special schools. The pretest was conducted with this initial sample. As expected, the
initial group of included children and children in
special schools differed significantly from one
another. The included children had higher IQs,
t(130) = 2.23, P = 0.027; better academic achievement scores, t(132) = 2.42, P = 0.017; and better

adaptive skills, t(132) = 2.00, P = 0.047. This finding

indicates that presently in Switzerland, children
with ID with higher levels of functioning, are more
often included than children with lower levels.
As having two groups with similar characteristics
and competences is crucial for the validity of a
quasi-experimental study (Gerstens et al. 2005),
this initial sample was reduced. All the included
children with high levels could not be kept in the
experimental group. Inversely, all the children in
special schools with low levels of functioning were
not kept in the control group. With this matching
of group characteristics, two groups of 38 children,
who did not differ as regards IQ, age, gender, socioeconomic status, associated impairments, academic
achievement and adaptive behaviour at the pretest
were formed.
A total of 76 children participated in the study.
However, four included children dropped out
during the study, because they had been assigned
to a special school after their first primary year. In
order to preserve the comparability of the two
groups, four children with similar characteristics
and competences at the pretest were also removed
from the control group.
The final research sample is composed of 68 participants, 34 in each group. No difference was
found between these two groups for all the controlled variables: age, U = 476.00, P = 0.210; socioeconomic status, t(64) = 0.80, P = 0.408; associated
impairments, c2(5) = 0.53, P = 0.991; cognitive skills
(IQs), U = 517.50, P = 0.457; literacy scores at the
pretest, t(66) = 0.89, P = 0.375; mathematic scores
at the pretest, t(66) = 0.58, P = 0.563; global score
at the ABAS-II, teacher form, t(66) = 0.55,
P = 0.581; and global score at the ABAS-II, parent
form, t(64) = 0.49, P = 0.623.
The participants were aged between 7.0 and 8.8
years at the beginning of the study. The sample has
an average IQ of 62.1 with a standard deviation of
9.8. Most of the participants had no associated
impairments. None of them had been diagnosed as
having an autistic spectrum disorder. The characteristics of each group are described in Table 1.
Children in the experimental group (the included
group) were fully included in general education
classrooms of their neighbourhoods school. They
received 4.30 to 6.30 h of support from a special
education teacher per week. Most of them (71%)

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

5
R. Sermier Dessemontet et al. Effects of inclusion on children with ID

Table 1 Description of the participants

Included group
n = 34
Gender
Girls
Boys
Age
Mean
Standard deviation
Minimum/maximum
Socio-economic status
High
Middle
Low
Associated impairments
Language disorder
ADHD
Motricity disorder
Behaviour disorder
Personality disorder
None
IQ
Mean
Standard deviation
Minimum/maximum

17
17
7.9
0.5
7.08.8

Special school
group n = 34

17
17
8.0
0.5
7.08.6

2
21
10

1
19
13

5
1
2
1
1
24

4
2
1
1
1
23

62.7
9.2
4375

61.5
10.5
4075

ADHD, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

were also provided with therapies, mostly speech

therapy. Children in the control group (special
school group) were educated in classrooms with 5
to 8 pupils with ID. These classes were conducted
by a special education teacher, often seconded by
an assistant. The majority of the children in special
schools (95%) were provided with therapies, mostly
speech and psychomotor therapies.

Procedure
Information about the participants was collected
through the directors of the centres and special
schools participating to the study. After obtaining
the written consent of the parents, they transmitted
the following information about each participant:
age, gender, associated impairments and global IQ
obtained at the last intelligence test.
The academic achievement test was conducted by
collaborators specially instructed for its administration. They were conducted individually, at the childrens respective schools, with each participant in a
room provided for the occasion.

The ABAS-II forms were sent to the teachers of

the participants. They passed on to the parents the
form intended for them. Parents and teachers were
requested to return the completed forms to the
main author in a postage-paid envelope. The services of translators were offered for parents who did
not master the language. A telephone information
service was also organised after office hours so that
teachers and parents could call if they needed help
to complete the scale. A very brief survey was also
given to the parents in order to collect data concerning their profession and education level. This
information was coded according to the International Standard Classification of Occupations and
then transformed into socio-economic status indices
with the International Socio-Economic Index of
occupational status from Ganzeboom, De Graaf &
Treiman (1992).

Data analysis
The statistical analyses were run with spss 16.
anovas for repeated measures were carried out on

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

6
R. Sermier Dessemontet et al. Effects of inclusion on children with ID

skills, F1.42, 93.92 = 211.6, P < 0.001, hp2 = 0.762,

and literacy skills, F1.49, 98.56 = 474.9, P < 0.001,
hp2 = 0.878. The means and standard deviations of
the included group and special school group are
presented in Table 2.

academic achievement and adaptive behaviour

scores in order to compare the progress done by
the two groups during two school years. When the
assumption of sphericity was violated, degrees of
freedom were corrected using the Greenhouse
Geisser correction.

Results for the ABAS-II scores

The results of the anovas indicate no difference
between the progress made by the two groups in
their adaptive behaviour as rated by their teachers,
F1, 66 = 1.13, P = 0.291, and parents, F1, 56 = 0.01,
P = 0.935. Independently of their type of placement
(inclusion special school), the participants made
significant progress in adaptive behaviour as rated
by their teachers, F1, 66 = 62.02, P < 0.001,
hp2 = 0.484, and parents, F1, 56 = 61.93, P < 0.001,
hp2 = 0.525. The means and standard deviations of
the included group and special school group are
presented in Table 3.

Results
Results for the academic achievement
tests scores
The results of the anovas indicate no difference
between the progress made by the two groups in
their mathematic skills during two school years,
F1.42, 93.92 = 1.51, P = 0.228. A significant difference
can be observed between the progress made by the
two groups in literacy skills, F1.49, 98.56 = 4.67,
P < 0.05. Effect size is, however, small (hp2 = 0.066).
The group of included children made slightly more
progress in literacy skills than the group of children
in special schools. Independently of their type of
placement (inclusion special school), the participants made important progress in their mathematic

Discussion
The aim of the present study was to compare the
progress of children with intellectual disabilities in

Table 2 Means and standard deviations (SD) of the included group and the special school group on mathematic and literacy scores

t1
Variable
Literacy
Mathematics

Included group (n = 34)

Special school group (n = 34)
Included group (n = 34)
Special school group (n = 34)

t2

t3

Means

SD

Means

SD

Means

SD

27.0
24.4
18.5
19.8

12.4
11.7
9.1
9.0

43.6
36.0
26.4
26.6

17.1
13.8
12.7
10.9

61.5
53.1
36.6
35.1

18.1
17.1
15.3
14.9

Table 3 Means and standard deviations (SD) of the included group and the special school group on Adaptive Behavior Assessment System
Second edition (ABAS-II), teacher and parent forms

t1
Variable
ABAS-II teacher form score
ABAS-II parent form score

Included group (n = 34)

Special school group (n = 34)
Included group (n = 32)
Special school group (n = 26)

t2

Means

SD

Means

SD

149.3
152.5
129.7
136.7

25.9
22.5
31.4
40.9

174.7
185.9
154.3
160.8

28.8
24.5
34.6
38.7

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

7
R. Sermier Dessemontet et al. Effects of inclusion on children with ID

inclusive versus special school settings. Children

included in general education classrooms did not
differ significantly from children in special schools
as regards their progress in mathematics and global
adaptive behaviour. However, a significant, but
slight, difference was noted between the progress of
the two groups in literacy. Before discussing these
findings, it is important to examine the methodological strengths and limitations of this study, and
their implications for the interpretation of results.
The comparability of the included and special
school groups on different control variables, the
pre-test/post-test design, the use of standardised
measures and the use of two sources of information
for the measurement of adaptive behaviour can be
considered as the major strengths of this study.
However, some limitations must also be mentioned:
the absence of an unbiased source of childrens
adaptive behaviour rating, and the fact that 10
parents did not return the ABAS-II at the t2, which
caused some attrition for this measure. The impact
of these two limitations is, however, reduced by
some considerations. First, using scales of adaptive
behaviour filled out by informants who know the
child in question well is the recommended method
to assess the adaptive behaviour of children with ID
(Borthwick-Duffy 2006; Dixon 2007; Schalock et al.
2010). Second, the attrition for the measurement
of adaptive behaviour by parents did not endanger
the comparability of the two groups, notably
regarding their adaptive behaviour at the pretest,
t(56) = 0.732, P = 0.457. It can therefore be concluded that the results of the present study can be
interpreted with an adequate degree of confidence.
This study found that the included children made
slightly more progress in literacy skills than children
in special schools. This result corresponds to the
findings of previous studies which highlighted an
advantage of inclusion for the development of academic skills (Freeman & Alkin 2000; Turner et al.
2008) and, more precisely, academic language skills
(Peetsma et al. 2001) and reading skills (Laws et al.
2000). This study did not find a significant difference between the progress of the included group
and special school group in mathematics. This corresponds to the findings of previous studies which
measured the progress accomplished by the participants in mathematics during one school year (Cole
et al. 2004) or two school years (Peetsma et al.

2001). In the study of Peetsma et al. (2001), a

significant difference between the progress of the
included and special school group in mathematics
appeared only after four years of follow-up.
As regards adaptive behaviour, no difference was
found between the progress of children with ID in
inclusive and special school settings. This result is
similar to the findings of previous studies done with
children or teenagers with moderate or severe ID
(Cole & Meyer 1991; Saint-Laurent et al. 1993;
Hardiman et al. 2009).
Finally, a key finding of this study is that the
children with ID made important progress in their
literacy skills, mathematic skills and adaptive behaviour displayed at school and at home during the
two years of follow-up, independently of their type
of placement.
We can conclude from this study that inclusion in
general education classrooms with 4.30 to 6.30 h of
support per week is an appropriate alternative to an
education in separate settings for primary pupils
with ID who require extensive support in school.
This study gives empirical support to the actual
efforts made to develop more inclusive practices for
children with ID in Switzerland, as well as in other
countries. It is very important that parents of children with ID, wherever they live, have the possibility to choose the least restrictive environment for
the education of their child.

Acknowledgement
Funding for this study was supported by the Swiss
National Science Foundation research grant: SNF
100014-116009.

References
Berger C. (2004) Lenseignement spcialis en Suisse
romande et au Tessin. Aperu prsent par les responsables
cantonaux. dition SZH/CSPS. Lucerne.
Borthwick-Duffy S. A. (2006) Adaptive behavior. In:
Handbook on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
(eds J. W. Jacobson, J. A. Mulick & J. Rojahn),
pp. 27991. Springer, Washington, DC.
Bouck E. C. (2007) Lost in translation? Educating secondary students with mild mental impairment. Journal
of Disability Policy Studies 18, 7987.

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

8
R. Sermier Dessemontet et al. Effects of inclusion on children with ID

Buckley S., Bird G., Sacks B. & Archer T. (2006) A comparison of mainstream and special education for teenagers with Down syndrome: implications for parents and
teachers. Down Syndrome Research and Practice 9, 5467.
Buysse V., Bailey D. B., Smith T. M. & Simeonson R. J.
(1994) The relationship between child characteristics
and placement in specialized versus inclusive early
childhood programs. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education 14, 41935.
Cole C. M., Waldron N. & Majd M. (2004) Academic
progress of students across inclusive and traditional
settings. Mental Retardation 42, 13644.
Cole D. A. & Meyer L. H. (1991) Social integration and
severe disabilities: a longitudinal analysis of child outcomes. The Journal of Special Education 25, 34051.
Confrence suisse des Directeurs cantonaux de
lInstruction Publique (CDIP) (2007) Accord intercantonal sur la collaboration dans le domaine de la pdagogie
spcialise. Available at: http://www.edudoc.ch/static/web/
arbeiten/sonderpaed/konkordat_f.pdf (retrieved 1
October 2011).
Dixon D. R. (2007) Adaptive behavior scales. In:
International Review of Research in Mental Retardation
(ed. J. L. Matson), pp. 99140. Elsevier Academic Press,
Amsterdam.
EADSNE (2003) Special Education across Europe in 2003.
Trends in Provision in 18 European Countries. European
Agency for Development in Special Needs Education,
Middelfart.
EADSNE (2008) Special Needs Education. Country Data.
European Agency for Development in Special Needs
Education, Odense.
Eaves L. C. & Ho H. H. (1997) School placement and
academic achievement in children with autistic spectrum disorders. Journal of Developmental and Physical
Disabilities 9, 27791.
Farell P. (2000) The impact of research on developments
in inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive
Education 4, 15362.
Ferguson D. L. (2008) International trends in inclusive
education: the continuing challenge to teach each one
and everyone. European Journal of Special Needs Education 23, 10920.
Fischer M. & Meyer L. H. (2002) Development and
social competence after two years for students enrolled
in inclusive and self-contained educational programs.
Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities 27,
16574.
Foreman P. (2009) Education of Students with An Intellectual Disability. Research and Practice. Information Age
Publishing Inc, Charlotte, NC.
Freeman S. F. N. & Alkin M. C. (2000) Academic and
social attainments of children with mental retardation
in general education and special education settings.
Remedial and Special Education 21, 318.

Frick P. J., Barry C. T. & Kamphaus R. W. (2010) Clinical

Assessment of Child and Adolescent Personality and Behavior. Springer, New York.
Ganzeboom H. B. G., De Graaf P. M. & Treiman D. J.
(1992) A standard International Socio-Economical
Index of occupational status. Social Science Research 21,
156.
Gerstens R., Fuchs L. S., Compton D., Coyne M., Greenwood C. & Innocenti M. S. (2005) Quality indicators
for group experimental and quasi-experimental research
in special education. Exceptional Children 71, 14964.
Gresham F. M. & MacMillan D. L. (1997) Social competence and affective characteristics of students with mild
disabilities. Review of Educational Research 67, 377415.
Hardiman S., Guerin S. & Fitzsimons E. (2009) A comparison of the social competence of children with moderate intellectual disability in inclusive versus segregated
school settings. Research in Developmental Disabilities 30,
397407.
Harris S. L. & Handleman J. S. (2000) Age and IQ at
intake as predictors of placement for young children
with autism: a four- to six-year follow-up. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders 30, 13742.
Harrison P. L. & Oakland T. (2002) Adaptive Behavior
Assessment System, 2nd edn. The Psychological
Corporation, San Antonio, TX.
Hegarty S. (1993) Reviewing the literature on integration.
European Journal of Special Needs Education 8, 194200.
Hunt P. & McDonnell J. (2009) Inclusive education. In:
Handbook of Developmental Disabilities (eds S. L. Odom,
R. H. Horner, M. E. Snell & J. Blacher), pp. 26991.
The Guilford Press, New York; London.
Kozma A., Mansell J. & Beadle-Brown J. (2009) Outcomes in different residential settings for people with
intellectual disability a systematic review. American
Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 114,
193222.
Laws G., Byrne A. & Buckley S. (2000) Language and
memory development in children with Down syndrome
at mainstream and special schools: a comparison.
Educational Psychology 20, 44757.
Lindsay G. (2007) Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming. British
Journal of Educational Psychology 77, 124.
Moser U. & Bayer N. (2007) LEst 69: Lern- Und
Entwicklungsstand bei 6- bis 9-Jhrigen. Unverffentlichtes
Testinstrument. Kompetenzzentrum fr Bildungsevaluation und Leistungsmessung an der Universitt Zrich,
Zrich.
Moser U., Berweger S. & Lchinger-Hutter L. (2004)
LEst 47: Lern- und Entwicklungsstand bei 4- bis
7-Jhrigen. Unverffentlichtes Testinstrument. Kompetenzzentrum fr Bildungsevaluation und Leistungsmessung an der Universitt Zrich, Zrich.

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Journal of Intellectual Disability Research

9
R. Sermier Dessemontet et al. Effects of inclusion on children with ID

Myklebust J. O. (2007) Diverging paths in upper secondary education: competence attainment among students
with special educational needs. International Journal of
Inclusive Education 11, 21531.
OECD (2007) lves prsentant des dficiences, des difficults
dapprentissage et des dsavantages sociaux. Politiques,
statistiques et indicateurs. OECD, Paris.
Osborne S. S., Schulte A. C. & McKinney J. D. (1991) A
longitudinal study of students with learning disabilities
in mainstream and resource programs. Exceptionality 2,
8195.
Peetsma T., Vergeer M., Roeleveld J. & Karsten S. (2001)
Inclusion in education: comparing pupils development
in special and regular education. Educational Review 53,
12535.
Powell J. J. W. (2006) Special education and the risk of
becoming less educated. European Societies 8, 57799.
Ruijs N. M. & Peetsma T. D. (2009) Effects of inclusion
on students with and without special educational needs
reviewed. Educational Research Review 4, 6779.
Rust J. O. & Wallace M. A. (2004) Test review: Adaptive
Behavior Assesment System Second edition. Journal
of Psychoeducational Assessment 22, 36773.

Saint-Laurent L., Fournier A.-L. & Lessard J.-C. (1993)

Efficacy of three programs for elementary school
students with moderate mental retardation. Education
and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental
Disabilities 28, 33348.
Schalock R. L., Borthwick-Duffy S. A., Bradley V. J.,
Bruntix W. H. E., Coulter D. L., Craig E. et al. (2010)
Intellectual Disability. Definition, Classification and
Systems of Supports, 11th edn. American Association
on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities,
Washington, DC.
Turner S., Alborz A. & Gayle V. (2008) Predictors of
academic attainments of young people with Downs
syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 52,
38092.
Wendelborg C. & Tssebro J. (2008) School placement
and classroom participation among children with disabilities in primary school in Norway: a longitudinal
study. European Journal of Special Needs Education 23,
30519.

Accepted 15 September 2011

2011 The Authors. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd