Using data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study–2 results of a propensity score analysis revealed significant causal effects for inclusive placement in high school on postsecondary education outcomes for adolescents with learning disabilities or emotional-behavior disorders 2 years after high school completion. Students earning 80% or more of their academic credits in general education settings (inclusive placement) were twice as likely to enroll and persist in postsecondary education when compared with students receiving fewer credits in inclusive classroom settings. These findings extend results of past descriptive and correlational studies by detecting a direct causal link between inclusion and postsecondary education.
AlgozzineB.YsseldykeJ. (2006). Teaching students with mental retardation: A practical guide for every teacher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
2.
AlqurainiT.GutD. (2012). Critical components of successful inclusion of students with severe disabilities: Literature review. International Journal of Special Education, 27, 42–59. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2012.01248.x
3.
AronL.LoprestP. (2012). Disability and the education system. Future of Children, 22, 97–122. doi:10.1353/foc.2012.0007
4.
BarkleyR. A. (2006). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
5.
BenzM. R.LindstromL.YovanoffP. (2000). Improving graduation and employment outcomes of students with disabilities: Predictive factors and student perspectives. Exceptional Children, 66, 509–529.
6.
BlackorbyJ.WagnerM. (1996). Longitudinal postschool outcomes of youth with disabilities: Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study. Exceptional Children, 62, 399–413.
CalabreseR.PattersonJ.LiuF. (2008). An appreciative inquiry into the circle of friends program: The benefits of social inclusion of students with disabilities. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 4(2), 20–48.
9.
CaliendoM.KopeinigS. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22, 31–72. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x
10.
CametoR.CadwalladerT. W.WagnerM. (2003). The daily living and social skills of youth with disabilities. In WagnerM.LevineP.CametoR.CadwalladerT. W.MarderC.BlackorbyJ.CardosoD. (Eds.), The individual and household characteristics of youth with disabilities (pp. 6.1–6.14). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
11.
ColeC. (2006). Closing the achievement gap series: Part III. What is the impact of NCLB on the inclusion of students with disabilities?Bloomington: Center for Evaluation and Education Policy, Indiana University. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED495750)
12.
ColeC.WatdronN.MajdM. (2004). Academic progress of students across inclusive and traditional settings. Mental Retardation, 42, 136–144. doi:10.1352/0047-6765(2004)42<136:APOSAI>2.0.CO;2
13.
DaDeppoL. M. W. (2009). Integration factors related to the academic success and intent to persist of college students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24, 122–131. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00286.x
14.
DehejiaR. H.WahbaS. (2002). Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 151–161. doi:10.1162/003465302317331982
15.
DessemontetR. S.BlessG.MorinD. (2012). Effects of inclusion on the academic achievement and adaptive behavior of children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 56, 579–587. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01497.x
16.
FierrosE. G.ConroyJ. W. (2002). Double jeopardy: An exploration of restrictiveness and race in special education. In LosenD. J.OrfieldG. (Eds.), Racial inequity in special education (pp. 39–70.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
17.
ForemanP.Arthur-KellyM. (2008). Social justice principles, the law and research as basis for inclusion. Australian Journal of Special Education, 32, 109–124.
18.
ForemanP.Arthur-KellyM.PascoeS.KingB. S.DowningJ. (2004). Evaluating the educational experiences of students with profound and multiple disabilities in inclusive and segregated classroom settings: An Australian perspective. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 29, 183–193. doi:10.2511/rpsd.29.3.183
19.
FratturaE.CapperC. (2006). Segregated programs versus integrated comprehensive service delivery for all learners: Assessing the differences. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 355–364. doi:10.1177/07419325060270060501
20.
GoodmanJ. I.HazelkornM.BucholzJ. L.DuffyM. L.KittaY. (2011). Inclusion and graduation rates: What are the outcomes?Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 21, 241–252. doi:10.1177/1044207310394449
21.
GreggN. (2007). Underserved and unprepared: Postsecondary learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 219–228. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00250.x
22.
GreggN. (2009). Adolescents and adults with learning disabilities and ADHD: Assessment and accommodation. New York, NY: Guilford.
23.
GreshamF. M.ElliotS. N. (1990). Social skills rating system manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
24.
HallahanD. P.KauffmanJ. M.PullenP. C. (2009). Exceptional learners: Introduction to special education (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
25.
HarryB.KlingnerJ. (2006). Why are so many minority students in special education? Understanding race and disability in schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
26.
HowardK. A. S.CarlstromA. H.KatzA. D.ChewA. Y.RayG. C.LanaineL.CaulumD. (2011). Career aspirations of youth: Untangling race/ethnicity, SES, and gender. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79, 98–109. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.s.12.002
27.
KatzJ.MirendaP.AuerbachS. (2002). Instructional strategies and educational outcomes for students with developmental disabilities in inclusive “multiple intelligences” and typical inclusive classrooms. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 27, 227–238. doi:10.2511/rpsd.27.4.227
28.
LechnerM. (2000). A note on the common support problem in applied evaluation studies (Discussion Paper No. 2001-01). St. Gallen, Switzerland: Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
29.
LindsayG. (2007). Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 1–24.
30.
LindstromL.DorenB.MieschJ. (2011). Waging a living: Career development and long-term employment outcomes for young adults with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77, 423–434.
31.
LosenD. J.OrfieldG. (2002). Racial inequity in special education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
MansetG.SemmelM. I. (1997). Are inclusive programs for students with mild disabilities effective? A comparative review of model programs. The Journal of Special Education, 31, 155–180. doi:10.1177/002246699703100201
33.
McCaffreyD. F.RidgewayG.MorralA. R. (2004). Propensity score estimation with boosted regression for evaluating causal effects in observational studies. Psychological Methods, 9, 403–425. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.403
34.
McLaughlinM. J.TilstoneC. (2000). Standards and the curriculum: The core of educational reform. In McLaughlinM. J.RouseM. (Eds.), Educational reform in the United States and Britain (pp. 38–65). London, England: Routledge.
35.
McLeskeyJ.LandersE.HoppeyD.WilliamsonP. (2011). Learning disabilities and the LRE mandate: An examination of national and state trends. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 60–66. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00326.x
36.
McLeskeyJ.WaldronN. L. (2011). Educational programs for elementary students with learning disabilities: Can they be both effective and inclusive?Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 48–57. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00324.x
37.
MorganP. L.FriscoM. L.FarkasG.HibelJ. (2008). A propensity score matching analysis of the effects of special education services. The Journal of Special Education, 43, 236–254. doi:10.1177/0022466908323007
38.
MorningstarM. E.FreyB. B.NoonanP. M.NgJ.Clavenna-DeaneB.GravesP.. . .Williams-DiehmK. (2010). A preliminary investigation of the relationship of transition preparation and self-determination for students with disabilities in postsecondary educational settings. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 33, 80–94. doi:10.1177/0885728809356568
39.
MurrayC. (2003). Risk factors, protective factors, vulnerability, and resilience: A framework for understanding and supporting the adult transitions of youth with high-incidence disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 16–26. doi:10.1177/074193250302400102
40.
MurrayC.GoldsteinD. E.NourseS.EdgarE. (2000). The postsecondary school attendance and completion rates of high school graduates with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15, 119–127. doi:10.1207/SLDRP1503_1
41.
NewmanL.WagnerM.CametoR.KnokeyA. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school: A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) [NCSER 2009-3017]. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
42.
NewmanL.WagnerM.CametoR.KnokeyA.-M.ShaverD. (2010). Comparisons across time of the outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school: A report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) and the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) [NCSER 2010-3008]. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED512149)
43.
NewmanL.WagnerM.HuangT.ShaverD.KnokeyA.-M.YuJ.. . .CametoR. (2011). Secondary school programs and performance of students with disabilities: A special topic report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) [NCSER 2012-3000]. Washington, DC: National Center for Special Education Research U.S. Department of Education.
44.
ObiakorF. E.HarrisM.MutuaK.RotatoriA.AlgozzineB. (2012). Making inclusion work in general education classrooms. Education & Treatment of Children, 35, 477–490. doi:10.1353/etc.2012.0020
45.
ParrishT. (2002). Racial disparities in the identification, funding, and provision of special education. In LosenD. J.OrfieldG. (Eds.), Racial inequity in special education (pp. 15–37). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
46.
ReaP. J.McLaughlinV. L.Walther-ThomasC. (2002). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Exceptional Children, 68, 203–223.
47.
ReiterJ. (2000). Using statistics to determine causal relationships. American Mathematical Monthly, 107, 24–32. doi:10.2307/2589374
48.
RidgewayG.McCaffreyD.MorralA.BurgetteL.GriffinB. A. (2012). Toolkit for weighting and analysis of nonequivalent groups: A guide to the twang package, ver1.2-6. Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/twang/twang.pdf
49.
RobinsJ. M.HernanM. A.BrumbackB. (2000). Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology, 11, 550–560. doi:10.1097/00001648-200009000-00011
50.
RojewskiJ. W.LeeI. H.GreggN.GemiciS. (2012). Development patterns of occupational aspirations in adolescents with high-incidence disabilities. Exceptional Children, 78, 157–178.
51.
RubinD. B.ThomasN. (1996). Matching using estimated propensity scores: Relating theory to practice. Biometrics, 52, 249–264. doi:10.2307/2533160
52.
SabornieE. J.EvansC.CullinanD. (2006). Comparing characteristics of high-incidence disability groups: A descriptive review. Remedial and Special Education, 27, 95–104. doi:10.1177/07419325060270020701
53.
SalendS. J.DuhaneyL. M. G. (1999). The impact of inclusion on students with and without disabilities and their educators. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 114–126. doi:10.1177/074193259902000209
54.
SeoY.AbbottR. D.HawkinsJ. D. (2008). Outcome status of students with learning disabilities at ages 21 and 24. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 300–314. doi:10.1177/0022219407311308
55.
SkibaR. J.Poloni-StaudingerL.GalliniS.SimmonsA. B.Feggins-AzzizL. R. (2006). Disparate access: The disproportionality of African American students with disabilities across educational environments. Exceptional Children, 72, 411–424.
56.
SkibaR. J.SimmonsA. B.RitterS.GibbA. C.Karega RauschM.CuadradoJ.ChungC.-G. (2008). Achieving equity in special education: History, status, and current challenges. Exceptional Children, 74, 264–288.
57.
TestD. W.MazzottiV. L.MustianA. L.FowlerC. H.KorteringL.KohlerP. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving postschool outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32, 160–181. doi:10.1177/0885728809346960
58.
U.S. Department of Education. (2011). 30th annual report to congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2008. Washington, DC: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Special Education Programs.
59.
WagnerM.NewmanL.CametoR.GarzaN.LevineP. (2005). After high school: A first look at the postschool experiences of youth with disabilities. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED494935)
60.
WesselR. D.JonesJ. A.MarkleL.WestfallC. (2009). Retention and graduation of students with disabilities: Facilitating student success. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 21, 116–125.
61.
WestlingD. L.FoxL. (2009). Teaching students with severe disabilities (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
62.
YoungG.BrowningJ. (2005). Learning disabilities/dyslexia and employment—A mythical view. In ReidG.FawcettA. (Eds.), Dyslexia in context: Research, policy, and practice (pp. 25–59). London, England: Whurr.
