dissertation on autism and education

Advertisement

Educator Attitudes Towards the Inclusion of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in Mainstream Education: a Systematic Review

• Review Paper
• Open access
• Published: 19 January 2022
• Volume 10 , pages 477–491, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Amy Russell 1 ,
• Aideen Scriney 1 &
• Sinéad Smyth 1  

18k Accesses

8 Citations

4 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Educator attitudes towards inclusive education impact its success. Attitudes differ depending on the SEN cohort, and so the current systematic review is the first to focus solely on students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Seven databases searched yielded 13 relevant articles. The majority reported positive educator attitudes towards ASD inclusion but with considerable variety in the measures used. There were mixed findings regarding the impact of training and experience on attitudes but, where measured, higher self-efficacy was related to positive attitudes. In summary, educator ASD inclusion attitudes are generally positive but we highlight the need to move towards more homogeneous attitudinal measures. Further research is needed to aggregate data on attitudes towards SEN cohorts other than those with ASD.

Similar content being viewed by others

Leading Systems Change to Support Autistic Students

Improving Student Attitudes Toward Autistic Individuals: A Systematic Review

Approaches to Inclusion and Social Participation in School for Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Conditions (ASC)—a Systematic Research Review

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Until relatively recently, students were frequently separated based on their perceived education needs. Students with special educational needs (SEN) were often educated in special education settings while their remaining peers were educated in what are often termed mainstream settings (Armstrong et al., 2011 ). Interest in wider issues of social inclusion, however, has led to consideration of how education may play a role in promoting social cohesion. As such, educational inclusion has become a central focus in many countries during the last decade (Qvortrup & Qvortrup, 2018 ). In educational contexts, inclusion is a teaching philosophy in which students with special educational needs (SEN) are actively engaged with their typically developing peers (Voltz et al., 2001 ). In practice, inclusion is considered ‘the continuing process of increasing the presence, participation and achievements of all children and young people’ (Ainscow, 2005 ). It is important to note that such definitions go beyond the simple placement of students with SEN in mainstream classrooms, as opposed to in specific specialised settings. Such a conceptualisation would reduce ‘inclusion’ to an issue of admission or placement and ignores the more complex dynamic side of inclusion as an effort to promote participation rather than simple placement with no reference to support and practices.

Under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child ( 1989 ), every child has a right to education free from discrimination. Therefore, inclusive education is considered an important human rights issue (Ruijs & Peetsma, 2009 ). The United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO, 2017 ) guidelines state that inclusion and equity should be acknowledged as principles for guiding educational policies and practices. UNESCO ( 2009 ) argues that inclusion benefits all learners as it focuses on responding to diverse needs and promotes a fairer society. Despite this, the practicality of ‘inclusive education’ still appears to be problematic in the eyes of some educators (Ainscow & Sandill, 2010 ; Allan, 2014 ). Although there has been a push by policymakers for individuals with SEN to be included in mainstream classrooms, there has been a lack of appropriate support for staff and students (Costello & Boyle, 2013 ). According to Mitchell ( 2014 ), ‘good teaching’ is systematic, explicit and intensive applications of effective teacher strategies. Such strategies should be appropriate to all learners even if they have to be adapted towards their specific educational needs (Norwich, 2003 ; Norwich & Lewis, 2001 ). Empirical studies show that pupils with SEN benefit from ‘good teaching’, even if it is not in a dedicated environment (Mitchell, 2014 ). A good quality education is paramount but a good quality inclusive education is optimal. If inclusion is being implemented internationally, it is important to determine if it works for all cohorts, and if it does not, we need to determine why not.

Educators’ beliefs are used as personal guidelines for defining and understanding educational contexts and roles (Zheng, 2009 ). These beliefs are resilient to rational arguments and scientific proofs which contradict them (UNESCO, 2002 ). Educators play a crucial role in the implementation of inclusive education (Ainscow, 2007 ; Rose & Howley, 2007 ) and their attitudes towards inclusion are vital for success (Loreman et al., 2011 ). However, inclusive education is suggested to be one of the most challenging issues for educators (Atta et al., 2009 ). The American Psychological Association ( 2021 ) defines an attitude as ‘a relatively enduring and general evaluation of an object, person, group, issue or concept on a dimension ranging from negative to positive’. For the purpose of this review, attitude refers to how the educator evaluates the inclusion of the student or SEN in question. Positive attitudes of educators have been related to successful inclusion of students with SEN in mainstream educational institutions (Roberts et al., 2008 ). Educators’ attitudes influence their willingness to accommodate and persist with difficult students and their beliefs about students’ abilities to learn (Stauble, 2009 ). A seminal research study on the impact of teacher expectation on student achievement was conducted by Rosenthal and Jacobson ( 1968 ). They found when teachers were told that some students (picked at random) did poorly on intelligence tests, when these students were revisited, their progress was significantly lower than their peers. This is called the ‘Pygmalion Effect’. It is the idea that the expectations of leaders (in this case, teachers) can influence the progress of the subordinate (the student). This is mainly because teachers put more effort into the students they expect to do well. Therefore, if educators do not believe that students with SEN will do well, they will not put effort into teaching them, and thus, these students will perform poorly.

Research has suggested that educators’ attitudes towards inclusion differ according to disability type. Specifically, educators have more positive attitudes towards the inclusion of students with physical or mild learning disabilities compared to those with emotional disorders, cognitive impairments or behavioural issues (Cumming, 2011 ; De Boer et al., 2011 ; Rae et al., 2010 ). It, therefore, appears to be crucial to look at educator attitudes towards different SEN cohorts separately. However, to date, no researchers have attempted to aggregate data on the attitudes of educators on the inclusion of subsets of students with SEN. By assessing attitudes towards SEN in general, we may miss out on nuanced data about attitudes towards the inclusion of specific student groups.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) comprises a range of neurodevelopmental disorders which are characterised by social impairments, communication difficulties and repetitive and restrictive patterns of behaviours (American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ). As the ‘spectrum’ title suggests, individuals with ASD range in their social, communicative and intellectual abilities (Campisi et al., 2018 ). ASD affects about 1–2% of children worldwide (Elsabbagh et al., 2012 ) and the rate of diagnoses has increased dramatically over the last thirty years (Blaxill, 2004 ; Newschaffer et al., 2007 ). Individuals with ASD are also prone to having comorbid mental health disorders (van Steensel et al., 2011 ; Williams & Roberts, 2018 ). Many experience hyperactivity, attention deficits, executive function, social and communication deficits as well as self-injurious and stereotypic behaviours and emotional instability (Cappadocia et al., 2012 ). It is common for students with ASD to underachieve relative to their cognitive ability (Ashburner et al., 2010 ). The difficulties associated with ASD may lead to challenges in mainstream environments for these students (van Roekel et al., 2010 ), which may impact educators’ attitudes about the appropriateness of this environment for them. Although many individuals with ASD have significant deficits in functioning, many children diagnosed with ASD are highly functioning. Students with ASD are more likely to be excluded from school than most other groups of learners (Barnard, 2000 ; Department for Education & Skills, 2006 ; National Autistic Society, 2003 ). This may be because teaching students with ASD presents significant instructional challenges for educators which may lower their self-efficacy for working with these students (Anglim et al., 2018 ; Klassen et al., 2011 ; Rodden et al., 2018; Ruble et al., 2013 ). Two-thirds of teachers reported lacking confidence and being apprehensive about teaching a student with ASD (Anglim et al., 2018 ). Pupils with ASD are sometimes viewed as more difficult to include than other learners with SEN (House of Commons Education & Skills Committee, 2006 ). Teachers report experiencing tension when dealing with the difficulties these students have in social and emotional understanding (Emam & Farrell, 2009 ) and regard teaching students with ASD as particularly challenging (Simpson et al., 2003 ). As prevalence rates of ASD are so high in school settings and the impairments experienced can impact the classroom in different ways depending on the severity of behaviours displayed (Leonard & Smyth, 2020 ), it is important to assess the attitudes towards the inclusion of students with ASD specifically.

Educators engaging successfully with students with ASD must have an understanding of the social, cognitive and behavioural characteristics of the population (Simpson, 2004 ). Every student with ASD has unique strengths and weaknesses, and therefore, teaching strategies may be successful for some and not for others (Morrier et al., 2011 ). Educators often do not possess relevant knowledge to implement student-focused evidence-based practice (Freeman et al., 2014 ; Morrier et al., 2011 ; Paynter et al., 2017 ). Mainstream teachers report inadequate preparation and lack of ASD-specific training (Busby et al., 2012 ) as a reason for their poor attitudes towards inclusion of these students. Training can improve the self-efficacy of educators (Benoit, 2013 ) and relationships with students with ASD (Blatchford et al., 2009 ), reducing levels of occupational stress (Baghdadli et al., 2010 ). Leach and Duffy ( 2009 ) suggest that teaching pupils with ASD requires specific approaches that mainstream teachers may not be familiar with. Thus, training in the area might remedy this.

There are other perceived needs for successful inclusion. Both new and experienced teachers indicate that their greatest concern regarding inclusive education is inadequate resources and lack of staff (Forlin & Chambers, 2011 ; Round et al., 2016 ). As every child with ASD has unique needs, lack of resources is often cited by teachers to explain their reservations about inclusion of these learners (Busby et al., 2012 ; Ruel et al., 2015 ). Assessing the attitudes of educators and the factors influencing these will allow for the specific needs identified to be addressed and improve attitudes, thus enhancing inclusive education.

Review Purpose

Inclusion of students with SEN in mainstream education is recognised as a human right (Ruijs & Peetsma, 2009 ) and is thought to have benefits for all students (UNESCO, 2009 ). It has been found that positive attitudes of educators facilitate successful inclusion (Roberts et al., 2008 ), and importantly, that these attitudes seem to be dependent on disability type, with those with behavioural, social and emotional difficulties usually being least accepted (Khochen & Radford, 2012 ). ASD proves particularly difficult for inclusion because each student has unique abilities and deficits in these domains (Anglim et al., 2018 ). To date, systematic reviews have focused on SEN in general, rather than on attitudes towards specific SEN cohorts. Therefore, results may be overgeneralized. Aggregating data on educators’ attitudes towards ASD inclusion specifically could greatly assist in understanding the implementation of inclusive educational practices for children with ASD. The aim of the current review was to aggregate data on the attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream educational settings and to examine the factors which influence these attitudes. A review of this nature can help to draw attention to the importance of seeking out nuanced attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of different subsets of SEN to gain a deeper understanding of inclusive education practices.

Search Strategy

A systematic search of the literature was conducted across seven databases: PsycINFO, CINAHL Complete, British Education Index, Education Research Complete, UK and Ireland Reference Centre, PsycArticles and Web of Science. The searches were conducted on the 5th of March 2021 (Web of Science search run and added 19th of March, 2021). The key search terms were as follows: ((Inclu* OR integrat* OR ‘inclusive education’) AND (Attitude* OR opinion* OR perspective* OR perception*) AND (Education OR mainstream OR school*) AND (ASD or autism spectrum disorder OR autism spectrum OR autism OR autistic OR Asperger*)).

Eligibility Criteria

To design the inclusion criteria for this review, the PICOSS (participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design and setting) was used. It has been adopted by Cochrane and other systematic review organisations (Schardt et al., 2007 ). The inclusion criteria have been summarised in Table 1 . Studies were included in the final analysis if they (1) investigated educator attitudes regarding the educational inclusion of school aged children and adolescents diagnosed with ASD and (2) the participants were current educators. Studies were not included if (1) they were a review of previous studies, (2) they referred to students in settings other than primary or secondary education (e.g. preschool or third level education), (3) participants were not educators or were not currently working (including retired educators or pre-service educators), (4) attitudes were not clearly stated, (5) qualitative only studies and (6) any studies that only focused on attitudes towards inclusion of students with SEN but which did not allow for extraction of attitudes towards students with ASD specifically. The majority of the included studies refer to ‘autism’ or ‘Autism Spectrum Disorder’ but one study refers to ‘Asperger’s Syndrome’ (Agyapong et al., 2010 ). In 2013, Asperger’s syndrome became recognised under the umbrella of ‘Autism Spectrum Disorders’ under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ).

Details of Methods

In order to minimise bias, the review was conducted with a team of two reviewers and a supervisor. Results from each database were exported to ‘Zotero’ reference manager (Corporation for Digital Scholarship, 2021 ), where duplicates were removed before uploading to Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation, 2021 ). Covidence, a web-based software, was used throughout the remainder of the review. Each reviewer had access and independently screened the title and abstracts of the retrieved studies. The two reviewers then met to discuss the conflicts which arose during title and abstract screening and a consensus was reached. At the full-text screening phase, if the full text of a study was not available, the author was contacted and asked to provide it. The reviewers again independently screened the texts at this stage and met to discuss conflicts. The first reviewer conducted data extraction on all papers and the second reviewer conducted data extraction on 30% of the included studies. There was full agreement between the reviewers on the data extraction. Quality assessment was conducted by both reviewers and they again met to reach a consensus on the scores for each study.

Data Extraction

The first reviewer extracted data into a pre-prepared excel sheet for the papers chosen at full-text screening. The components extracted from each study were as follows: (1) name of study; (2) authors; (3) year of publication; (4) brief note on the study design; (5) sample size; (6) participant details (gender, mean age, occupation); (7) measures, means and standard deviations of outcome measures; (8) factors mentioned which influence educator attitudes.

Quality Assessment

The quality of the studies included in the review was assessed using the Quantitative Quality Appraisal Tool (adapted from Dunne et al., 2017 and Jefferies et al., 2012 ). The Quantitative Quality Appraisal tool asks 12 questions of the paper being assessed, with four possible answers: yes (score of 2 points), partial (score of 1 point), no (score of 0) and do not know (score of 0). Studies scoring 17–24 were considered good quality, 9–16 acceptable quality and 0–8 low quality. A summary of the quality appraisal ratings is included in the table of study characteristics (Table 2 ).

Synthesis of Results

A narrative synthesis was chosen to analyse the data, due to the heterogeneity of the measures. This type of synthesis is useful for explaining the ‘why’ behind phenomena. The data extracted from the studies was organised into themes. These themes are discussed later in the ‘ Results ’ section.

Following database searches, 3954 articles were identified for possible inclusion, as outlined in Fig.  1 . Of these, 1196 articles were duplicates and were subsequently excluded. Upon initial screening of the abstracts of the remaining 2758 articles, it was determined that 2601 did not meet inclusion/exclusion criteria and 157 articles did. Following full-text review, of the 157 articles, 13 fulfilled the necessary inclusion/exclusion criteria and were included in the review. Summary characteristics of these studies are provided in Table 2 .

PRISMA diagram for studies considered for the systematic review

Study Characteristics

A total of 3247 educators participated across the 13 identified studies. The sample sizes ranged from 72 to 863 and included general education (both primary and post primary), special education and physical education teachers, principals and instructors. Five studies did not present data on gender (Agyapong et al., 2010 ; Horrocks et al., 2008 ; McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ; Salceanu, 2020 ; Su et al., 2020 ), but of the remaining studies, 1756 participants were female, and 326 were male. Two studies reported mean ages of 46 and 38.8 (Beamer & Yun, 2014 ; Segall & Campbell, 2014 ). Six studies reported their ages in categories, all participants were adults, with the youngest category being reported as ‘20–30’ and the oldest being ‘50 + ’ (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ; Bjornsson et al., 2019 ; Cassimos et al., 2015 ; Garrad et al., 2019 ; Lu et al., 2020 ; Salceau, 2020). The other studies did not report ages of their participants. Study locations varied from the USA ( n  = 3) to Ireland ( n  = 2), Romania ( n  = 1), Jordan ( n  = 1), Iceland ( n  = 1), Greece ( n  = 1), Australia ( n  = 1), China ( n  = 2) and Scotland ( n  = 1). All studies were cross-sectional in nature.

Attitude Measures

There was considerable diversity in the scales used to measure the attitudes of participants, with six established scales in total and only one scale (the Autism Attitude Scale for Teachers; Olley et al., 1981 ) used more than once. Other studies used the Teacher’s Beliefs and Intentions towards Teaching Students with Disabilities (Jeong & Block, 2011 ), Principal’s Perspective Questionnaire (Horrocks, 2005 ), Impact of Inclusion Questionnaire (Hastings & Oakford, 2003 ), Inclusion of Children with Special Needs in Public Schools Questionnaire (Chitu et al., 2016) and Placement and Services Survey (Segall & Campbell, 2007 ). An additional six studies created their own surveys rather than using an existing measure (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ; Agyapong et al., 2010 ; Bjornsson et al., 2014; Cassimos et al., 2015 ; McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ; Su et al., 2020 ). These surveys addressed the opinions of educators about the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream education.

Attitudes of Educators: Educational Placement

Not surprisingly, given the heterogeneity of measures, the attitudes of educators were presented in a number of different ways. This made synthesis of results particularly difficult. Eight studies equated the opinions of their participants on the educational placement of students with ASD as representing their attitudes towards the inclusion of these students. However, the phrasing of the reported attitudes showed considerable variation. Abu-Hamour and Muhaidat ( 2013 ) asked participants if students with ASD should have the right to attend mainstream. Agyapong and colleagues (2010) asked if these students should be taught in mainstream classrooms. Cassimos and colleagues (2015) inquired whether their participants would accept these students in their classroom. Segall and Campbell ( 2014 ) asked which cohort of SEN is most appropriate for mainstream education. Salceanu ( 2020 ) asked participants what they thought the best solution was for the educational placement of these students. Su and colleagues (2020) presented the opinions of their participants on whether or not these students could be taught in mainstream classrooms. The final two studies (Bjornsson et al., 2019 ; McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ) showed some uniformity by asking participants where they thought was most appropriate for these students to be taught. These measures all purport to determine the attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream so, therefore, they have been synthesised as such, but there are subtle differences between them.

In four of the eight studies which equated attitudes towards inclusion with beliefs about appropriate educational placement of autistic students, a large majority of participants showed positive attitudes towards the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream education (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 , 79.3%; Agyapong et al., 2010 , 71.1%; Segall & Campbell, 2001, 66.7%; Su et al., 2020 , 60.9%). Two studies found only a moderately positive attitude towards the inclusion of these students (Cassimos et al., 2015 , 56.1%, Salceanu, 2020 , 56.7%). The final two studies found their participants to have negative attitudes (Bjornsson et al., 2019 , 50.1%, McGregor & Campbell, 2001 , 68.7%).

Attitudes of Educators: Attitude Scales

The alternative approach to measuring attitudes towards inclusion was to use attitude scales and presenting the mean results of these. Five studies followed this model. These attitude scales represent a more affective measure of attitudes, gauging beliefs about inclusion and the perceived impacts of the inclusion of these students. Two of these studies found their participants to have a significantly positive attitude towards inclusion (Beamer & Yun, 2014 , 6.65 out of 7; Garrad et al., 2019 , 4.11 out of 5). Two other studies found moderately positive attitudes of their participants (Horrocks et al., 2008 , 3.76 out of 5; Lu et al., 2020 . 3.20 out of 5). One study found largely negative or neutral attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD (Leonard & Smyth, 2020 ; 54% with negative attitude, 36% neutral). Therefore, most studies who measured using attitude scales reported positive mean attitudes towards the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream education. The majority of the included studies found positive attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream education (c.f. Leonard & Smyth, 2020 ). There were no consistent differences in attitudes across educator type, country of publication or sample size. It is important to note, however, that the measures of attitudes were heterogeneous, making synthesis difficult and perhaps masking differences across studies.

Factors Influencing Attitudes

There were a number of factors examined within the studies which influenced the attitudes of participants. The common themes that emerged were experience and training, personal factors, perceived needs and student skills.

Experience and Training

The impact of experience on the attitudes of educators was measured in seven of the 15 studies. Three studies found that teaching experience did not influence attitudes (Garrad et al., 2019 ; Leonard & Smyth, 2020 ; Segall & Campbell, 2014 ). Three studies found that more experience led to more positive attitudes towards integration into mainstream education (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ; Cassimos et al., 2015 ; McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ). Another two studies found the opposite that experience led to more negative attitudes (Horrocks et al., 2008 ; Su et al., 2020 ). Therefore, considerable variation exists surrounding whether or not experience has an impact on the attitudes of educators’ and the direction of this impact.

Training in SEN and ASD was another factor which was assessed for its relationship to inclusion attitudes. Participants in five studies stated that they lacked specific training on ASD (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ; Agyapong et al., 2010 ; Bjornsson et al., 2019 ; McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ; Salceanu, 2020 ). Two studies found training in SEN in general or ASD in particular did not influence the inclusion attitudes of their participants (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ; Leonard & Smyth, 2020 ). Two studies found that the inclusion of ASD was more likely to be supported by educators who had training in the area (Agyapong et al., 2010 ; Cassimos et al., 2015 ). Garrad and colleagues (2019) found that there was a small positive relationship between attitudes and ASD-specific training but that it did not predict attitudes. Again, there was mixed evidence on the impact of training on educators’ attitudes with two studies stating there is no impact and three finding a positive relationship between the two.

There was also variability in the types of educators included in the studies. Five studies included ‘special needs educators’. In these studies, special needs educators were classified as those who were working in specialised placements with students with SEN. For example, Abu-Harmour and Muhaidat (2013) included ‘special education teachers who worked in special education centres that provided focused teaching for low-functioning students’ (p.34). Three of these studies found positive attitudes (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ; Salceanu, 2020 ; Su et al., 2020 ) and the other two found negative attitudes (Bjornsson et al., 2019 ; McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ). McGregor and Campbell ( 2001 ) highlighted the difference between special educators and mainstream educators with experience working with students with SEN and those without. Forty-seven percent of specialist staff strongly agreed or agreed that full integration should be aimed for where possible, 47% of experienced mainstream staff agreed but only 27% of inexperienced mainstream staff thought full inclusion should happen where possible. Four percent of specialised staff strongly disagree or disagreed with full integration where possible, compared with 20% of experienced mainstream staff and 31% of inexperienced mainstream staff. Cassimos and colleagues (2015) also found that individuals with previous training or experience of working with students with ASD were more willing to include these learners in their classroom (73.5% of those with training and 81.3% of those with experience, compared to  46.2% and 46.3% of those with no training or experience, respectively).

Personal Factors

Of the personal factors investigated, the most common was the impact of self-efficacy on the attitude of educators which was examined in three studies. Beamer and Yun ( 2014 ) and Lu and colleagues (2020) found a significant, positive correlation between self-efficacy and inclusion attitudes of their participants (0.59 and 0.34, respectively). Segall and Campbell ( 2014 ) found that self-efficacy was a predictor of placement decisions. Beamer and Yun ( 2014 ) found very small correlations between undergraduate training in adapted physical education (0.05) and graduate training in adapted physical education (0.06) and self-efficacy. However, Segall and Campbell ( 2014 ) found a moderate correlation between self-efficacy and training (0.5). Another personal factor which was examined in the included studies was knowledge of ASD. Two studies investigated the effect of knowledge on attitudes, with mixed findings. One study found a significant positive relationship between knowledge and attitudes (Lu et al., 2020 ). However, another found that knowledge of ASD did not predict placement decisions (Segall & Campbell, 2014 ).

In addition to self-efficacy and knowledge, researchers also examined the relationship between factors such as gender, subject taught, subjective norms and type of educational institution. The two studies which assessed gender found no significant relationship with inclusion attitudes (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ; Leonard & Smyth, 2020 ). However, these studies did not have even spreads of gender, with female participants far out-weighing males. Those from ages 20 to 30 were found to be more accepting of the inclusion of students with ASD (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ). It was also found that educators who focused on teaching academic subjects had significantly lower inclusion attitude scores (Su et al., 2020 ). Subjective norms of teachers (i.e., taking into account what their colleagues think) were found to be significant predictors of placement opinions (Segall & Campbell, 2014 ). Segall and Campbell ( 2014 ) found that the educators’ perception of the disruptive behaviours did not influence their placement decisions. The influence of the type of institution the educator currently works in was found to have an influence on attitudes with educators in private schools and centres being found to have more positive attitudes (Abu-Hamour & Muhaidat, 2013 ).

Perceived Needs

There were a number of perceived needs for successful inclusion cited by participants in the included studies. Some educators felt that they lacked the capability and understanding to deal with these students’ needs (Cassimos et al., 2015 ; Salceanu, 2020 ). McGregor and Campbell’s ( 2001 ) participants believed that integration was dependent on educators’ attitude while participants in Salceanu’s ( 2020 ) study felt that differential assessment strategies and curriculum adaptation were necessary for inclusion. The need for closer collaboration between schools and psychiatric services was also mentioned in one study (Agyapong et al., 2010 ). Beyond these staff related factors, resources and funding were the main needs cited in four studies (Agyapong et al., 2010 , 77.3% of participants; Cassimos et al., 2015 , 70.2%; Leonard & Smyth, 2020 , 66%; McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ). Three of these four studies reported that participants felt that they did not have the necessary resources and funding to accommodate a student with ASD (Agyapong et al., 2010 , 77.3% of participants; Cassimos et al., 2015 , 70.2%; Leonard & Smyth, 2020 , 66%). Human resources featured frequently with educational psychologists, speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, special needs assistants (Agyapong et al., 2010 ), human resources (Leonard & Smyth, 2020 ) and adequate auxiliary help (McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ) considered to be required for inclusion. Leonard and Smyth ( 2020 ) also mentioned the need for classroom materials. All studies examining resources asked questions in different ways, making a clearer synthesis of the findings difficult.

Student Skills

Two studies reported on participant opinions of student skills which impact on successful inclusion in mainstream school. Abu-Harmour and Muhaidat (2013) reported participants’ perception that for inclusion to be successful, students with ASD needed to have certain skills. Cassimos and colleagues (2015), by contrast, reported on their participants’ views of student related factors that were barriers to inclusion. Cross over between the perceived barriers and facilitators between these two studies was in the area of communication and social skills. The specific skills noted by participants in Abu-Harmour and Muhaidat (2013) were ranked in order of importance as independence, imitation, behavioural, play, social, routine, language, pre-academic and academic. Their participants reported these as being necessary in order for students to navigate the social environment, communicate their needs, understand communication from other people and acquire strategies to help them learn with and through their peers. Cassimos and colleagues’ (2015) barriers were once again listed in order of perceived importance and comprised introvertedness, communication problems, obsessive, stereotypical and self-stimulatory behaviour and incomprehensible language of these students. These participants also voiced that vocational training was a better option for learners with ASD (69.7%). It is important to note that these were participant opinions and not evidence-based however, and additional three of the included studies (Horrocks et al., 2008 ; McGregor & Campbell, 2001 ; Segall & Campbell, 2014 ) investigated how the abilities of students with ASD impacted the educator’s attitude about their placement. Horrocks and colleagues (2008) measured the placement decisions of principals based on the description of five different pupils. All of the pupils described presented with a diagnosis of ASD. They found that those students who were described as having good academic performance were more often recommended to have high levels of inclusion by the principals. The participants were also found to be less likely to recommend high levels of inclusion in the students who showed social detachment. Segall and Campbell ( 2014 ) provided their participants with descriptions of a student, Robby. There were six variations of Robby provided—moderate intellectual disability with no label, with label of autism, and with just label of an intellectual disability and average cognitive ability with no label, with label of autism, and with label of Asperger’s syndrome. The study found that the cognitive ability of Robby affected the teachers’ opinions regarding his placement. Participants reported that their own classroom was a less appropriate placement for students with a label of autism versus no label. However, the label of Asperger’s syndrome did not affect placement decisions when compared to the label of autism or no label at all. McGregor and Campbell ( 2001 ) asked participants what factors influence successful inclusion. Eighteen percent of specialist staff, 20% of experienced mainstream staff and 16% of inexperienced mainstream staff agreed or strongly agreed that successful inclusion depended on the academic ability of the student. A larger majority of the participants strongly agreed that the student’s degree of autism was a factor influencing successful inclusion. Participants were also asked if ‘able’ children were better educated in mainstream school. The responses were close on this item with 39% of specialist staff, 34% of experienced mainstream staff and 21% of inexperienced mainstream staff agreeing or strongly agreeing. It would appear that the cognitive abilities of the student impacts educators’ attitudes regarding their educational placement.

Potential Bias

All included studies were considered to be of good or acceptable quality according to the quality appraisal tools employed. The key areas in which the studies were downgraded were lack of control groups and not describing their non-responders. However, the use of a control group in studies such as this may not have been appropriate to answer the research questions. The overall risk of bias across the studies was considered to be low. All studies clearly stated their aims and objectives and adhered to them. There was no evidence of selective reporting and sampling bias across the studies.

While previous systematic reviews have explored the literature on educator attitudes towards the inclusion of students with SEN in mainstream education, no known published reviews have examined the inclusion of a specific cohort of students with SEN, those with a diagnosis of ASD. Given the diverse profiles of students with SEN, examining attitudes towards inclusion of students with SEN as a whole group may result in over generalisation and omitting specific attitudinal trends with regard to the inclusion of students with ASD. The aim of the current review was therefore to conduct the first systematic review to aggregate data on the attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream education and the factors which influence these. A search of the literature yielded 13 eligible studies with a total of 3247 participants. These included participants in a number of different education roles and settings. Furthermore, these studies reported huge diversity in the attitudinal measures employed, making a narrative synthesis of the data the most appropriate approach.

Overall, the majority of the included studies reported that educators were in favour of the inclusion of students with ASD. It is interesting to note that attitudes towards inclusion did not vary across educator types. Hernandez et al. ( 2016 ), when examining attitudes towards general SEN inclusion, rather than ASD specifically, found that special education teachers had significantly more positive inclusion attitudes than their general education counterparts. They also found teacher type was a predictor of inclusion attitudes. From the findings of McGregor and Campbell ( 2001 ), it appears that attitudes towards the inclusion of students with ASD differ depending on the extent of experience with this group of learners. Cassimos and colleagues (2015) similarly reported that previous experience with students with ASD made educators more willing to accept them in their classroom. Perhaps giving experience and training in working with individuals with ASD to mainstream educators will make them more willing to accept these learners in their classroom.

Heterogeneity of Measures

Caution should be taken when considering these findings given that there was a considerable amount of heterogeneity of measures used in the included studies, which made synthesis difficult. Many studies created their own scales and presented their findings in different manners, making comparison challenging. It was not only the variety of measures which made synthesis difficult, but also the way in which attitudes were measured. As previously mentioned, attitudes were gauged using either affective measures or binary (yes/no) questions regarding where these students should be taught. Previous reviews which aimed to synthesise data on the attitudes of educators towards students with SEN also had similar issues. Lautenbach and Heyder’s ( 2019 ) systematic review for example saw a number of distinct measures used, the majority of which were self-constructed. Attitudes towards individuals with SEN, including ASD, are multi-faceted and include the domains of cognition, affect and behaviour (Nowicki & Sandieson, 2002 ). Therefore, comparing data from measures which may not be assessing the same domain may be futile. Antonak and Larrivee ( 1995 ) advised that the use of existing scales which are refined, revised and updated as necessary is preferable to creating new measures. Particular attention should be paid to choosing if attitudes are best estimated using affective measures or using binary placement questions. By reaching a consensus on which attitude scales to use in future research of this nature, more valuable information will be obtained. However, as this is the first review of its type, it would not be expected that an agreed upon measure would be used throughout studies.

The findings of predominantly positive attitudes towards the inclusion of students with ASD is despite known educational challenges for this cohort. Students with ASD are the most likely cohort of learners to be excluded from school (Barnard, 2000 ; Department for Education & Skills, 2006 ; National Autisitic Society, 2003). It has been found that students with ASD present significant instructional challenges for educators (Anglim et al., 2018 ; Klassen et al., 2011 ; Rodden et al., 2019 ; Ruble et al., 2013 ) and are often viewed as difficult to include (House of Commons Education & Skills Committee, 2006 ). Therefore, exploring the factors influencing these attitudes is important. Training in ASD and SEN and educator experience were the factors most assessed in the included studies. The results of the current synthesis found mixed evidence on the impact of training and experience on the attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD. Mainstream teachers often report a lack of specific ASD training as a reason for their apprehension to include these pupils (Busby et al., 2012 ).

Training did not clearly relate to more positive educator attitudes; however, self-efficacy of educators was found to have a positive relationship with inclusion attitudes, in the three studies where it was assessed. According to Bandura’s ( 1997 ) social cognitive theory, educator efficacy is concerned with educators’ appraisals of their capabilities to influence student outcomes (Wheatley, 2002 ). If educators believe that they are able to teach students with ASD and produce positive outcomes, they will be more willing to include them. Previously, increased self-efficacy has been linked with training (Benoit, 2013 ). However, two of the included studies which examined self-efficacy found mixed results on the correlations between training and self-efficacy. Interestingly, while a large majority of participants in Segall and Campbell’s ( 2014 ) study were confident in their ability to teach students with ASD (87%), only about one-third of them had ASD-specific training. Further research is needed to assess the impact of training on self-efficacy as self-efficacy can appear to have an impact on educators’ inclusion attitudes.

Resources and funding were the most cited need within the included studies, with many participants reporting that they did not feel that they had the necessary resources to include a student with ASD. Perception of available resources has a major influence on teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002 ). Inclusive education would not be possible without resources (Goldan & Schwab, 2020 ). However, high quality resources do not lead to high quality inclusive education (Loreman, 2014 ). The provision of resources, however, may improve the educators’ inclusion attitudes and, therefore, improve the inclusive education experience. In keeping with the current findings, research on general SEN resource needs found that personnel needs were the most commonly cited (Chiner & Cardona, 2013 ). The current findings suggest that educators do not feel that the inclusion of students with ASD requires distinct resources from general SEN inclusion and, therefore, these supports should be straightforward to deliver.

Perceived student skills necessary for success in mainstream settings were also highlighted by participants in some studies. While some involved academic abilities, many did not and showed a tendency for educators to express the belief that social and behavioural skills are most important for inclusion. It is interesting that many of the symptoms inherent in this cohort were reported as constraining for inclusion, for example, communication problems. Does this suggest that only students with low levels of stereotypical ASD symptoms are believed to be successful in mainstream education? Many of the studies did not assess participants’ attitudes towards students with ASD of differing abilities. Future research is needed to collect this type of evidence which would further enrich knowledge found in the current review.

There were a number of challenges and benefits to the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream education both for the students themselves and for their peers. For example, the educators felt that mainstream education taught students with ASD life skills and prepared them for the future but that they may be bullied. For peers of students with ASD, the educators felt that inclusion taught them tolerance and understanding but that there may be a disruption in the class due to the student with ASD requiring extra assistance. By knowing the perceived benefits and challenges to inclusion of students with ASD from the perspective of the educator, a more in-depth understanding of what may be contributing to educators’ attitudes has been gained.

Implications of the Findings

The findings of this review provide an insight into the attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD, for the first time. Research has been conducted to show educators’ attitudes towards general SEN inclusion, which encompasses many disabilities. Focusing on one cohort of the SEN population can provide more nuanced details. It has been found that educator attitudes towards inclusive education affect its successful implementation in mainstream classrooms (Ewing et al., 2018 ). Therefore, separating SEN cohorts and examining the attitudes of educators towards each one individually, a clearer understanding can be obtained and used to improve inclusive education. Some suggestions for improving educator attitudes and acceptance of the inclusion of students with ASD can also be found, for example, in targeting resourcing or educator perceptions of resourcing as well as targeting educator self-efficacy.

Limitations

The current review had a number of limitations, as with any study. A narrative synthesis was used in this review. This type of synthesis allows for interpretation and critique of the data and gives a deeper understanding (Greenhalgh et al., 2018 ). Often, meta-analyses are considered the gold standard for avoiding bias while synthesising data (Crombie & Davies, 2009). They allow for the quantification of beliefs about effects of variables using evidence from quantitative research (Jones et al., 2003 ). However, the data collected in this review did not lend itself to a meta-analysis. There were also a number of limitations to the included studies. As previously mentioned, many of the studies created their own measures of attitudes, many of which were not assessed for reliability or validity. While some of the sample sizes of the included studies were large (up to 863), others had small sample sizes and, therefore, the generalisability of their findings are limited.

Future Recommendations

Consensus on and standardisation of a measure to assess educator attitudes towards inclusion of students with ASD would make synthesis and comparison of results less complicated. It may encourage the replication of studies, thereby improving the reliability of findings. It is vital that more research be conducted on the reliability and validity of measures. Once the most effective measure has been identified, researchers must adopt this in future studies. By doing this, we can strengthen attitudinal research in this area. These measures can also then be adapted to other groups of learners with SEN to be able to assess attitudes towards their inclusion. However, in order to find the most effective measure, clarity must be sought regarding what is being measured. Further research is also needed to clearly define the relationship between inclusion attitudes and training and experience. It is also hoped that from this pioneering review, more research will be aggregated on different SEN cohorts (e.g. ADHD) so that a more comprehensive understanding of the inclusion attitudes of educators and how these can be improved can be gathered to create a more prosperous inclusive education environment. There were mixed findings regarding the impact of training and experience on the attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream education suggesting that more in depth research on this is needed. Regardless of these conflicting reports, it does appear that pre-service teachers may benefit from specialised placements and specific training. This would certainly fulfil a training need and may impact on attitudes towards inclusion. Beyond training, self-efficacy is also positively associated with inclusion attitudes (Beamer & Yun, 2014 ; Lu et al., 2020 ; Segall & Campbell, 2014 ). Further investigation into the relationship between training, placement experiences in pre-service training and years of experience on self-efficacy is needed to better understand their impact on attitudes and, therefore, on practice. Perhaps increasing the general public’s knowledge and experience with individuals with ASD would positively impact their attitudes towards these individuals, making the community a more inclusive place. Further research on the impact of knowledge and experience in the general public should be conducted.

The current review presents a unique insight into the attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of students with ASD in mainstream education. Aggregations of data on distinct SEN cohorts have not been conducted to date. The current review found that the majority of the included studies presented positive attitudes of educators towards the inclusion of these students. However, due to the diversity of approaches to measure attitudes, these results may not accurately represent educators’ attitudes. The factors which influenced these were also unclear. Self-efficacy was found to have a positive relationship with inclusion attitudes in these studies but evidence on the influence of training and experience on attitudes was mixed. From a facilitatory perspective, participants reported that resources and specific student skills were required for successful inclusion. The review also gave an insight into the perceived benefits and challenges of the inclusion of students with ASD from the perspective of educators. It is hoped that this review will inspire others like it so that more nuanced data can be established to give an in-depth understanding of educators’ inclusion attitudes as they are vitally important for successful inclusion.

Abu-Hamour, B., & Muhaidat, M. (2013). Special education teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion of students with autism in Jordan. Journal of the International Association of Special Education, 14 (1), 34–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2013.80202

Article   Google Scholar  

Agyapong, V., Migone, M., Crosson, C., & Mackey, B. (2010). Recognition and management of Asperger’s syndrome: Perceptions of primary school teachers. Ir J Psych Med, 27 (1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0790966700000835

Ainscow, M. (2005). Developing inclusive education systems: What are the levers for change? Journal of Educational Change, 6 , 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-005-1298-4

Ainscow, M. (2007). Taking an inclusive turn. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 7 (1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2007.00075.x

Ainscow, M., & Sandill, A. (2010). Developing inclusive education systems: The role of organisational cultures and leadership. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14 (4), 401–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110802504903

Allan, J. (2014). Inclusive education and the arts. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44 (4), 511–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2014.921282

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596

American Psychological Association. (2021). APA dictionary of psychology. Retrieved 4 June 2021, from https://dictionary.apa.org/attitude

Anglim, J., Prendeville, P., & Kinsella, W. (2018). The self-efficacy of primary teachers in supporting the inclusion of children with autism spectrum disorder. Educational Psychology in Practice, 34 (1), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2017.1391750

Antonak, R. F., & Larrivee, B. (1995). Psychometric analysis and revision of the opinions relative to mainstreaming scale. Exceptional Children, 62 (2), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299506200204

Armstrong, D., Armstrong, A. C., & Spandagou, I. (2011). Inclusion: By choice or by chance? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15 (1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2010.496192

Ashburner, J., Ziviani, J., & Rodger, S. (2010). Surviving in the mainstream: Capacity of children with autism spectrum disorders to perform academically and regulate their emotions and behavior at school. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 4 (1), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2009.07.002

Atta, M. A., Shah, M., & Khan, M. M. (2009). Inclusive school and inclusive teacher. The Dialogue, 4 (2), 272–283.

Google Scholar  

Avramidis, E., & Norwich, B. (2002). Teachers’ attitudes towards integration/inclusion: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 17 (2), 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250210129056

Baghdadli, A., Rattaz, C., Ledésert, B., & Bursztejn, C. (2010). Étude descriptive des modalités d’accompagnement sanitaire, médicosocial et scolaire des personnes avec troubles envahissants du développement (TED) et de la satisfaction des familles – Aspects méthodologiques. Neuropsychiatrie de l’Enfance et de l’Adolescence, 5 8(8), 469–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurenf.2010.07.014x

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . Freeman.

Barnard, J. (2000). Inclusion and autism: Is it working? 1,000 examples of inclusion in education and adult life from the National Autistic Society’s members . National Autistic Society.

Beamer, J. A., & Yun, J. (2014). Physical educators’ beliefs and self-reported behaviors toward including students with autism spectrum disorder. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 31 (4), 362–376. https://doi.org/10.1123/apaq.2014-0134

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Benoit, V. (2013). Intégration scolaire en Suisse: Focus sur le sentiment d’efficacité personnelle des enseignants.

Bjornsson, B. G., Saemundsen, E., & Njardvik, U. (2019). A survey of Icelandic elementary school teachers’ knowledge and views of autism–Implications for educational practices. Nordic Psychology, 71 (2), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2018.1480408

Blatchford, P., Bassett, P., Brown, P., & Webster, R. (2009). The effect of support staff on pupil engagement and individual attention. British Educational Research Journal, 35 (5), 661–686. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902878917

Blaxill, M. F. (2004). What’s going on? The question of time trends in autism. Public Health Reports, 119 (6), 536–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phr.2004.09.003

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Busby, R., Ingram, R., Bowron, R., Oliver, J., & Lyons, B. (2012). Teaching elementary children with autism: Addressing teacher challenges and preparation needs. Rural educator , 33 (2), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.35608/ruraled.v33i2.416

Campisi, L., Imran, N., Nazeer, A., Skokauskas, N., & Azeem, M. W. (2018). Autism spectrum disorder. British Medical Bulletin , 127 (1). https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldy026

Cappadocia, M. C., Weiss, J. A., & Pepler, D. (2012). Bullying experiences among children and youth with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42 (2), 266–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-011-1241-x

Cassimos, D. C., Polychronopoulou, S. A., Tripsianis, G. I., & Syriopoulou-Delli, C. K. (2015). Views and attitudes of teachers on the educational integration of students with autism spectrum disorders. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 18 (4), 241–251. https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2013.794870

Chiner, E., & Cardona, M. C. (2013). Inclusive education in Spain: How do skills, resources, and supports affect regular education teachers’ perceptions of inclusion? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17 (5), 526–541. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2012.689864

Corporation for Digital Scholarship. (2021). Zotero (Version 5.0) [Mac]. Retrieved from https://www.zotero.org/download/

Costello, S., & Boyle, C. (2013). Pre-service secondary teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education , 38 (4), 8. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2013v38n4.8

Cumming, T. M. (2011). The education of students with emotional and behavior disabilities in Australia: Current trends and future directions. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48 (1), 55–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451211423810

De Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2011). Regular primary school teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15 (3), 331–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110903030089

Department for Education and Skills. (2006) Permanent and fixed period exclusions from schools and exclusions appeals in England 2004/05 . Nottingham: DfES Publications.

Dunne, S., Mooney, O., Coffey, L., Sharp, L., Desmond, D., Timon, C., O’Sullivan, E., & Gallagher, P. (2017). Psychological variables associated with quality of life following primary treatment for head and neck cancer: A systematic review of the literature from 2004 to 2015. Psycho-Oncology, 26 (2), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.4109

Elsabbagh, M., Divan, G., Koh, Y.-J., Kim, Y. S., Kauchali, S., Marcín, C., et al. (2012). Global prevalence of autism and other pervasive developmental disorders. Autism Research , 5 (3), 160e179. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.239

Emam, M. M., & Farrell, P. (2009). Tensions experienced by teachers and their views of support for pupils with autism spectrum disorders in mainstream schools. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 24 (4), 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250903223070

Ewing, D. L., Monsen, J. J., & Kielblock, S. (2018). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education: A critical review of published questionnaires. Educational Psychology in Practice, 34 (2), 150–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2017.1417822

Forlin, C., & Chambers, D. (2011). Teacher preparation for inclusive education: Increasing knowledge but raising concerns. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 39 (1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866x.2010.540850

Freeman, J., Simonsen, B., Briere, D. E., & MacSuga-Gage, A. S. (2014). Pre-service teacher training in classroom management: A review of state accreditation policy and teacher preparation programs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37 (2), 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406413507002

Garrad, T. A., Rayner, C., & Pedersen, S. (2019). Attitudes of Australian primary school teachers towards the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 19 (1), 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12424

Goldan, J., & Schwab, S. (2020). Measuring students’ and teachers’ perceptions of resources in inclusive education–Validation of a newly developed instrument. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24 (12), 1326–1339. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1515270

Greenhalgh, T., Thorne, S., & Malterud, K. (2018). Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews?. European journal of clinical investigation, 48 (6). https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.12931

Hastings, R. P., & Oakford, S. (2003). Student teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special needs. Educational Psychology, 23 (1), 87–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410303223

Hernandez, D. A., Hueck, S., & Charley, C. (2016). General education and special education teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals 79(93).

Horrocks, J. L., White, G., & Roberts, L. (2008). Principals’ attitudes regarding inclusion of children with autism in Pennsylvania public schools. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38 (8), 1462–1473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-007-0522-x

Horrocks, J. (2005). Principals’ attitudes regarding inclusion of children with autism in Pennsylvania public schools . Unpublished doctoral dissertation , Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.

House of Commons Education and Skills Committee. (2006). Special educational needs: Third report of session 2005–06 . The Stationary Office Limited.

Jefferies, P., Gallagher, P., & Dunne, S. (2012). The Paralympic athlete: A systematic review of the psychosocial literature. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 36 (3), 278–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364612450184

Jeong, M., & Block, M. E. (2011). Physical education teachers’ beliefs and intentions toward teaching students with disabilities. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82 (2), 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2011.10599751

Jones, D., Roberts, K. A., Dixon-Woods, M., Fitzpatrick, R., & Abrams, K. R. (2003). Bayesian synthesis of qualitative and quantitative evidence: Overview and example. HDA Synthesis Series on Promoting Methodological Development in Evidence Synthesis: Understanding Bayesian Approaches to Synthesis.

Khochen, M., & Radford, J. (2012). Attitudes of teachers and headteachers towards inclusion in Lebanon. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16 (2), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603111003671665

Klassen, R. M., Tze, V. M., Betts, S. M., & Gordon, K. A. (2011). Teacher efficacy research 1998–2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise? Educational Psychology Review, 23 (1), 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9141-8

Lautenbach, F., & Heyder, A. (2019). Changing attitudes to inclusion in preservice teacher education: A systematic review. Educational Research, 61 (2), 231–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2019.1596035

Leach, D., & Duffy, M. L. (2009). Supporting students with autism spectrum disorders in inclusive settings. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45 (1), 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451209338395

Leonard, N. M., & Smyth, S. (2020). Does training matter? Exploring teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream education in Ireland. International Journal of Inclusive Education https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1718221

Loreman, T. (2014). Measuring inclusive education outcomes in Alberta, Canada. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18 (5), 459–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2013.788223

Loreman, T., Deppeler, J., Harvey, D., & Harvey, D. (2011). Inclusive education: Supporting diversity in the classroom . Crows Nest, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Lu, M., Zou, Y., Chen, X., Chen, J., He, W., & Pang, F. (2020). Knowledge, attitude and professional self-efficacy of Chinese mainstream primary school teachers regarding children with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 72 , 101513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2020.101513

McGregor, E. M., & Campbell, E. (2001). The attitudes of teachers in Scotland to the integration of children with autism into mainstream schools. Autism, 5 (2), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361301005002008

Mitchell, D. (2014). Hvad der virker i inkluderende undervisning – Evidensbaserede undervisnings- oglæringsstrategier. Frederikshavn: Dafolo.

Morrier, M. J., Hess, K. L., & Heflin, L. J. (2011). Teacher training for implementation of teaching strategies for students with autism spectrum disorders. Teacher Education and Special Education, 34 (2), 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406410376660

National Autistic Society. (2003). Autism and education: The ongoing battle . NAS.

Newschaffer, C. J., Croen, L. A., Daniels, J., Giarelli, E., Grether, J. K., Levy, S. E., ... & Reynolds, A. M. (2007). The epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders. Annu. Rev. Public Health , 28 , 235-258 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144007

Norwich, B., & Lewis, A. (2001). Mapping a pedagogy for special educational needs. British Educational Research Journal, 27 (3), 313–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920120048322

Norwich, B. (2003). Is there a distinctive pedagogy for learning difficulties?. Occasional Papers- Association for Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 25–38.

Nowicki, E. A., & Sandieson, R. (2002). A meta-analysis of school-age children’s attitudes towards persons with physical or intellectual disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 49 (3), 243–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912022000007270

Olley, J. G., Devellis, R. F., Devellis, B. M., Wall, A. J., & Long, C. E. (1981). The autism attitude scale for teachers. Exceptional Children, 47 (5), 371–372.

Paynter, J. M., Ferguson, S., Fordyce, K., Joosten, A., Paku, S., Stephens, M., ... & Keen, D. (2017). Utilisation of evidence-based practices by ASD early intervention service providers. Autism , 21 (2), 167-180 https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361316633032

Qvortrup, A., & Qvortrup, L. (2018). Inclusion: Dimensions of inclusion in education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 22 (7), 803–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1412506

Rae, H., Murray, G., & McKenzie, K. (2010). Teachers’ attitudes to mainstream schooling. Learning Disability Practice, 13 (10), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.7748/ldp2010.12.13.10.12.c8138

Roberts, J. M., Keane, E., & Clark, T. R. (2008). Making inclusion work: Autism Spectrum Australia’s satellite class project. Teaching Exceptional Children, 41 (2), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990804100203

Rodden, B., Prendeville, P., Burke, S., & Kinsella, W. (2019). Framing secondary teachers’ perspectives on the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorder using critical discourse analysis. Cambridge Journal of Education, 49 (2), 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2018.1506018

Rose, R., & Howley, M. (2007). The practical guide to special educational needs in inclusive primary classrooms . Sage.

Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The Urban Review, 3 (1), 16–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02322211

Round, P. N., Subban, P. K., & Sharma, U. (2016). “I don’t have time to be this busy”. Exploring the concerns of secondary school teachers towards inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20 (2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2015.1079271

Ruble, L. A., Toland, M. D., Birdwhistell, J. L., McGrew, J. H., & Usher, E. L. (2013). Preliminary study of the autism self-efficacy scale for teachers (ASSET). Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7 (9), 1151–1159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2013.06.006

Ruel, P., Poirier, N., & Japel, C. (2015). L’integration en classe ordinaire d’eleves presentant un trouble du spectre de l’autisme (TSA): La perception d’enseignantes du primaire. Revue De Psychoeducation, 43 (2), 37–61.

Ruijs, N. M., & Peetsma, T. T. (2009). Effects of inclusion on students with and without special educational needs reviewed. Educational Research Review, 4 (2), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2009.02.002

Salceanu, C. (2020). Development and inclusion of autistic children in public schools. BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience , 11 (1), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.18662/brain/11.1/12

Schardt, C., Adams, M. B., Owens, T., Keitz, S., & Fontelo, P. (2007). Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 7 (1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-7-16

Segall, M. J., & Campbell, J. M. (2007). Autism inclusion questionnaire . Unpublished measure.

Segall, M. J., & Campbell, J. M. (2014). Factors influencing the educational placement of students with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8 (1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2013.10.006

Simpson, R. L. (2004). Finding effective intervention and personnel preparation practices for students with autism spectrum disorders. Exceptional Children, 70 (2), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290407000201

Simpson, R. L., deBoer-Ott, S. R., & Smith-Myles, B. (2003). Inclusion of learners with autism spectrum disorders in general education settings. Topics in Language Disorders, 23 (2), 116–133.

Stauble, K. R. (2009). Teacher attitudes toward inclusion and the impact of teacher and school variables.Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1375. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/1375

Su, X., Guo, J., & Wang, X. (2020). Different stakeholders’ perspectives on inclusive education in China: Parents of children with ASD, parents of typically developing children, and classroom teachers. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24 (9), 948–963. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1502367

UNESCO. (2009). Policy guidelines on inclusion in education . UNESCO.

UNESCO. (2002). Learning to be: A holistic and integrated approach to values education for human development: Core values and the valuing process for developing innovative practices for values education toward International understanding and a culture of peace . Bangkok: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education.

UNESCO (2017). A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in education . Paris: UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000248254 .

UN General Assembly (1989). United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 . United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577, p. 3 .

Van Roekel, E., Scholte, R. H., & Didden, R. (2010). Bullying among adolescents with autism spectrum disorders: Prevalence and perception. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40 (1), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-009-0832-2

Van Steensel, F. J., Bögels, S. M., & Perrin, S. (2011). Anxiety disorders in children and adolescents with autistic spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 14 (3), 302.

Veritas Health Innovation. (2021). Covidence systematic review software [Mac]. Melbourne, Australia. Available at www.covidence.org

Voltz, D. L., Brazil, N., & Ford, A. (2001). What matters most in inclusive education: A practical guide for moving forward. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37 (1), 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/105345120103700105

Wheatley, K. F. (2002). The potential benefits of teacher efficacy doubts for educational reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18 (1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00047-6

Williams, K., & Roberts, J. (2018). Understanding autism: The essential guide for parents (Vol. 3). Exisle Publishing.

Zheng, H. (2009). A review of research on EFL pre-service teachers’ beliefs and practices. Journal of Cambridge Studies, 4 (1), 73–81.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The current paper was completed by the first author in part fulfilment of the MSc in Psychology and Well-being at Dublin City University. The second author acted as independent reviewer while the third and coordinating author was involved in supervision of the research including development, design, editing and proofreading.

Open Access funding provided by the IReL Consortium.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Psychology, Dublin City University, Glasnevin, Dublin 9, Ireland

Amy Russell, Aideen Scriney & Sinéad Smyth

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sinéad Smyth .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Russell, A., Scriney, A. & Smyth, S. Educator Attitudes Towards the Inclusion of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders in Mainstream Education: a Systematic Review. Rev J Autism Dev Disord 10 , 477–491 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-022-00303-z

Download citation

Received : 24 August 2021

Accepted : 06 January 2022

Published : 19 January 2022

Issue Date : September 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-022-00303-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Inclusive education
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Autism Dev Lang Impair
• v.7; Jan-Dec 2022

Strategies in supporting inclusive education for autistic students—A systematic review of qualitative research results

Linda petersson-bloom.

Faculty of Learning and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden; The National Agency for Special Needs Education and School (SPSM), Sweden

Mona Holmqvist

Faculty of Learning and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden

Associated Data

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-dli-10.1177_23969415221123429 for Strategies in supporting inclusive education for autistic students—A systematic review of qualitative research results by Linda Petersson-Bloom and Mona Holmqvist in Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-2-dli-10.1177_23969415221123429 for Strategies in supporting inclusive education for autistic students—A systematic review of qualitative research results by Linda Petersson-Bloom and Mona Holmqvist in Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-3-dli-10.1177_23969415221123429 for Strategies in supporting inclusive education for autistic students—A systematic review of qualitative research results by Linda Petersson-Bloom and Mona Holmqvist in Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-4-dli-10.1177_23969415221123429 for Strategies in supporting inclusive education for autistic students—A systematic review of qualitative research results by Linda Petersson-Bloom and Mona Holmqvist in Autism & Developmental Language Impairments

Background and Aim

Strategies to modify and adjust the educational setting in mainstream education for autistic students are under-researched. Hence, this review aims to identify qualitative research results of adaptation and modification strategies to support inclusive education for autistic students at school and classroom levels.

In this systematic review, four databases were searched. Following the preferred PRISMA approach, 108 studies met the inclusion criteria, and study characteristics were reported. Synthesis of key findings from included studies was conducted to provide a more comprehensive and holistic understanding.

Main Contribution

This article provides insights into a complex area via aggregating findings from qualitative research a comprehensive understanding of the phenomena is presented. The results of the qualitative analysis indicate a focus on teachers' attitudes and students' social skills in research. Only 16 studies were at the classroom level, 89 were at the school level, and three studies were not categorized at either classroom or school level. A research gap was identified regarding studies focusing on the perspectives of autistic students, environmental adaptations to meet the students' sensitivity difficulties, and how to enhance the students' inclusion regarding content taught and knowledge development from a didactic perspective.

Conclusions and Implications

Professional development that includes autism-specific understanding and strategies for adjusting and modifying to accommodate autistic students is essential. This conclusion may direct school leaders when implementing professional development programs. A special didactical perspective is needed to support teachers' understanding of challenges in instruction that autistic students may encounter.

Introduction

Based on the Salamanca Statement ( 1994 ), children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) should have access to inclusive education in general schools that are adapted to meet a diverse range of educational needs. Furthermore, The United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Article 24 ( Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2008 ), states that people with disabilities should receive the support they need to achieve an effective education and that effective individual support should be provided to maximize academic and social development, as well as United Nation's agenda 2030 Goal 4.5 which demands “equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and children in vulnerable situations” ( UN General Assembly, 2015 ). This has resulted in an increased prevalence of autistic students in ordinary classroom education during the last decade ( Maenner et al., 2020 ). The educational sector has to be prepared to educate autistic students in general school settings to a higher degree than before ( Parsons et al., 2011 ). Unfortunately, research has had a strong focus on research about inclusion rather than research in inclusive education ( Susinos & Parrilla, 2013 ). Even if both aspects are important, characteristics of qualitative studies in inclusive settings unveil the voices of students and parents and support ecological validity ( Ledford et al., 2016 ) when capturing aspects of importance of what needs autistic students have in the school-context. Combining and making sense of data from several smaller qualitative studies goes beyond the understanding of each single study, and results from several different studies conducted in various context can strengthen each study's findings ( Soilemezi & Linceviciute, 2018 ). Echeita et al. (2021) claim that qualitative research has the strength to give the students, and their families, respect to their voices by listening to their view of how inclusive education is experienced from their viewpoint and in what way they feel included in the school context. Even if almost 30 years have passed since the Salamanca Statement, for some reason it has been difficult to develop inclusive educational settings meeting the needs of autistic students. Goodall (2019) presents that in Ireland, it is stated that mainstream education is the best placement for autistic students. However, capturing the view of autistic teenage boys it is suggested that they perceive themselves as better supported in alternative education provision, which is identified in the students’ evaluation and their knowledge development ( Goodall, 2019 ). Furthermore, Merry (2020) , as well as Waddington and Reed (2017) support this finding and argue that students in regular schools do not automatically show greater academic development compared to autistic students in specialist placements. To provide society with research results to enhance the quality of inclusive education for autistic students, we suggest focusing on qualitative research to deepen and personalize the understanding of how inclusive education is experienced by the students. Research has tended to focus more on how autistic students can develop and change to enhance their possibilities to be included in a regular school environment, as opposed to examining what can be developed and changed in the learning environment ( Crosland & Dunlap, 2012 ; Osborne & Reed, 2011 ). As autism is a life-long condition, the strategies to adjust the educational setting to support it in a better way are a key aspect for creating inclusive education. But how and what is still not answered, which this systematic review addresses.

Present study

Several previous systematic reviews, mainly synthesizing quantitative research results, have focused on different types of interventions intended to develop skills in autistic individuals, enhancing their capability to handle mainstream education ( Bond et al., 2016 ; Watkins et al., 2017 ). The present systematic review instead focuses on environmental strategies (modifications and adaptations) at the school and classroom level to support the inclusive education of autistic students. There are two systematic reviews, which have focused on the physical environment, how to design a classroom to support autistic students ( Martin, 2016 ), and if modifications improve the physical environment ( Dargue et al., 2021 ). Furthermore, two recently published systematic reviews targeted interventions for peers of autistic students, aiming to change peers’ attitudes ( Cremin et al., 2020 ; Morris et al., 2021 ). A recently published systematic review investigated the effectiveness of school-related outcomes of interventions for autistic students ( Macmillan et al., 2021 ). In Leifler et al. (2020) , which included quantitative studies, accommodations to the learning environment were at focus, concluding that it is a promising area, but one that needs to be studied further.

This review differs from the previous by its focus on research studies using qualitative methods, capturing the respondents’ views and situations at a detailed level based on their experiences.

The rationale for this is based on the argument that qualitative studies in a review add to the comprehensive understanding of the phenomena ( Tong et al., 2016 ) to generate a broader insight regarding the perspective of the participants ( Chong et al., 2018 ). In related research fields, it has been claimed that qualitative studies “have been especially useful in improving understanding of patient experiences and perspectives” ( Cohen & Gooberman-Hill, 2019 , p. 2). Furthermore, synthesizing qualitative research makes results more substantial, as they include a greater variety of both participants and descriptions ( Sherwood, 1999 ). As such, this study focuses on students, teachers, and parents to better understand their experiences. Supporting the decision to synthesize qualitative research findings, Thomas and Harden (2008) underline the value of examining a more complex view: “The act of seeking to synthesize qualitative research means stepping into more complex and contested territory than is the case when only RCTs are included in a review” (p. 2).

Aim and research questions

This systematic review aimed to summarize and synthesize key findings of research results from qualitative analyses, focusing on results of modifications and adaptations at school and classroom levels for autistic students in general educational settings, to support inclusive education. The following research questions were asked:

• RQ 1: What results can be found regarding modifications and adaptations at school and classroom levels for autistic students?
• RQ 2: In what way do the studies consider the students’, families’, and teachers’ viewpoints?
• RQ3: Which gaps in can be found and addressed in future research?

Background of the study

The search is based on a project, aiming to capture both quantitative and qualitative studies. Details about the project can be found in PROSPERO (number: 2019 CRD42019124496). The review conducted by Leifler et al. (2020) reports the studies with a quantitative approach. The review methodology in the joint project followed the steps in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement ( Moher et al., 2009 ). The search was conducted in collaboration with a group of seven researchers from three universities who collaborated in the process of defining the search strategy and, to some extent, the initial screening. The studies were divided into two research groups based on methodology, that is, quantitative or qualitative methods, and this article reports the results of the qualitative analysis. However, during the search the team worked jointly in the first screening stages.

Search strategy

The search process started in September 2018 with the identification of possible search vocabularies, with test searches carried out in October 2018. The final searches were performed by two librarians, at the Karolinska Institute University Library in November-December 2018 (the full search strategy is provided as Supplementary Material search strategy). The literature search was performed using the following databases: ERIC (ProQuest), Medline (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), and Web of Science. Journal articles published in English between 1990 and 2018 were included.

The database searches retrieved 10,863 records, as shown in the PRISMA flow chart (Moher et al., 2009) in Figure 1 .

PRISMA flow chart.

Titles and abstracts from 5,722 records were assessed according to the eligibility criteria by two independent reviewers. The records were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria ( Table 1 ).

Table 1.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Pre-screening for identification of approaches

After the first screening stage ( Figure 1 ), 594 articles remained. A second screening process was conducted (stage 2) to divide the articles into groups according to whether they had quantitative or qualitative methodological approaches. At this stage, some articles were found to not meet the requirements of the inclusion criteria, thus resulting in the exclusion of 332 articles with quantitative methodologies and 105 articles for different reasons, as reported in Figure 1 . The full texts of the articles with qualitative methodologies that remained after abstract screening were then acquired.

Full-text review

As mentioned in PROSPERO, the authors of this article were responsible for analyzing the articles with a qualitative research approach. We independently screened the full texts of the articles using the same inclusion criteria that were used in the abstract screening process.

This screening led to a consensus regarding 114 articles to be included, 21 to be excluded, and 22 articles on which the reviewers disagreed regarding inclusion. Cohen's kappa was calculated, and the results showed moderate agreement (0.57). The articles which were disagreed upon were discussed until a resolution was achieved, which resulted in 5 more articles being added, to bring the total to 119 articles. Finally, after carefully reading the full text of each article, 11 more articles were excluded because they either did not meet the inclusion criteria or did not fulfill the qualitative checklist of the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (2018) ( Nadelson & Nadelson, 2014 ). All the excluded articles are reported in Figure 1 (eligibility). Thus, 108 articles were included for data extraction and synthesis.

Data extraction and data synthesis

Data were extracted using a standardized form designed by the authors in collaboration and included the following information: (a) author and publication year; (b) country in which the research was conducted; (c) diagnosis; (d) special educational needs and disabilities (SEND); (e) grades; (f) participants (students with ASD, peers, parents, teachers, paraprofessionals, and other school professionals); (g) method; (h) research focus; and (i) result/outcome. A template was designed, to increase the inter-rater reliability of coded data extraction. Each aspect above (a to i) had its own column, where information was inserted to give a sound overview of the included articles’ content. The descriptive coding ( Saldaña, 2014 ) of items (a) to (i) was carried out by the first author and checked for reliability by the second author. In qualitative systematic reviews, a variety of different methods is often used in conducting the synthesis ( Barnett-Page & Thomas, 2009 ). We integrated the results from each study via a qualitative text analysis of the results of the included articles. In Barnett-Page and Thomas (2009) , textural narrative synthesis includes study characteristics, context, and results being compared across studies. Further, as posited in Harden et al. (2004) structured summarizations can be developed and put into a wider context. For this, a thematic synthesis ( Thomas & Harden, 2008 ) of the studies’ results (i) was made by the second author, and checked for reliability by the first author. The thematic syntehsis aimed to capture the areas if interest in each study, and coding studies with the same focus into categories where the studies’ results where synthesized. In total, four categories of research focus were identified; Didactical perspective, Attitudes and views, Environmental sensitivity, and Social skills focus. Furthermore, in each category, the findings were divided into two levels; school and classroom.

The results are presented in two sections. In the first section the characteristics of the included studies are elaborated upon and in the second section key findings from the synthesis are presented. The references used in the synthesis are visualized within brackets as numbers and in a table illustrating authors and publication years ( Table 2 ). The descriptive analysis is fully reported in Supplementary Material (Descriptive Characteristics of Articles Synthesized).

Table 2.

References used visualized in the brackets with numbers.

Characteristics of included studies

In terms of provenance, most of the 108 articles were from English-speaking countries. This mirrors the databases used (English was the main language). In total, articles from 17 different countries were captured during the search ( Table 3 ).

Table 3.

Origin of research based on country.

Autistic students’ characteristics

The majority of the articles focused on students with typical learning development, excluding students with learning difficulties or intellectual disabilities (ID) in combination with autism. In total 39 of the studies included students from school grades in primary school. Secondary school is represented in 34 of the included studies. In 20 of the studies all school grade levels are included, indicating a more general and school-level research focus. In total, 70 articles included students from more than one grade level, while 34 studies examined only one explicit grade level.

Participants

In total, 61 articles included multiple participants’ perspectives on education outcomes. Teachers and other school staff (e.g., para-professionals) were represented in 80 of the included articles. In 22 studies, teachers’ perspectives were in focus, and in five, the perspective was that of school officials (paraprofessionals, principals, and other school staff). In total, 12 of the articles included a mix of staff members (e.g., teachers and other school staff).

A smaller number, 12 of the articles, focused only on the perspectives of autistic students [3, 11, 39, 40, 41, 49, 63, 74, 80, 81, 96, 105]. Data collected from autistic participants in combination with other participants’ perspectives were included in 46 studies. In total 33 of the articles included parents in different combinations. Five of these centered solely on parents. Peers were at focus in four of the articles, and with a mix of autistic students in three of the included articles. The school grade level of included peers ranges from primary to secondary school.

Research method

The methods used were mainly interviews; 66 articles used interviews to collect data. Case studies were implemented in 26 articles, questionnaires were qualitatively analyzed (mainly regarding attitudes) in 19 articles, observations in 12 studies, and a mixed-methods approach in 9 articles. In some articles, more than one method was used, but not as part of a mixed-methodology approach.

Research focus

Four categories of research focus were identified; Attitudes and views, Didactical perspective, Environmental sensitivity, and Social skills focus. The initial analysis indicated a majority of studies focusing on attitudes (e.g., experiences and views regarding inclusive teaching for autistic students). The outcomes in such studies are often teachers’ or other stakeholders increased attitudes towards inclusive education. The majority of the studies (80) included the views or attitudes of teachers or paraprofessionals. Teachers’ attitudes and views regarding inclusive education were found to be crucial for the success of inclusive strategies. In some studies, these were identified as one of the most important factors affecting whether or not autistic students reported positive experiences regarding inclusive education (e.g., Higginson & Chatfield, 2012 ), and whether the teachers accepted the autistic students ( Reupert et al., 2015 ).

Regarding communication and social relationships, studies have reported how acceptance can be strengthened. In 36 articles, some aspects of social or communicative training or attitudes were examined by studying the social situation of autistic students ( Hay & Winn, 2005 ; Humphrey & Lewis, 2008b ) or social relationships and friendships (e.g., Calder et al., 2013 ; Cook et al., 2018 ; Daniel & Billingsley, 2010 ; Jones & Howley, 2010 ). As they often have altered social and communicative abilities, this focus might contradict the attitude of accepting students’ difficulties as a result of the education situation.

Key findings synthesized: Strategies for inclusive education

The results of the reviewed studies are in total summarized in Supplementary Material (Categories and Research Results). Articles not referred to directly in the text are presented as references in the Supplementary Material (References, not referred to in the text). The key findings will be presented at the school and classroom levels.

School level

In total, 89 studies had a school-level perspective of inclusive education, and all of them focused on students’ social skills (13) or attitudes and views (52). In 24 articles, both perspectives were included.

A major result was limited professional development and knowledge about autism as a challenge and limitation for inclusive education, which was found in 31 studies [2, 4, 5, 6, 16, 18, 22, 24, 28, 30, 32, 34, 40, 42, 53, 54, 57, 59, 67, 74, 77, 83, 85, 91, 92, 94, 97, 99, 100, 101, 107]. Furthermore, the challenges with autistic symptoms and meeting the needs of the students were found to be difficult for teachers to handle in a traditional mainstream class, depending on the severity of autism, which was reported in eight studies [16, 18, 24, 25, 40, 48, 53, 90]. In the studies by Humphrey and Lewis (2008a , 2008b) and Kucharczyk et al. (2015) , this was also supported by data from students. Moreover, Ashby (2010) found that pupils with disabilities felt alienated in the classroom and that the teachers downplayed their differences.

After participating in professional development on autism, teachers were reported to show more positive attitudes regarding inclusive education [7, 9, 10, 38, 75]. Barned et al. (2011) identified that attitudes were related to the severity of the challenges faced by the children; for example, for children with more severe disabilities, teachers had more negative attitudes regarding inclusive schooling. A similar result was also reported by Carter et al. (2014) , where students’ characteristics were identified as barriers to inclusive education. Furthermore, Barned et al. (2011) determined that even if the teachers had positive attitudes, they sometimes misunderstood what autism constitutes. Another study ( Bond et al., 2017 ) found increased self-efficacy in teachers after participating in a professional development program focusing on autism. Various studies have indicated the need for professional development regarding inclusive education to help teachers cope with the challenges associated with teaching autistic students (e.g., Corkum et al., 2014 ; Young et al., 2017 ). Having investigated teaching assistants, Emam and Farrell (2009) established that they play an important role for both teachers and autistic students, as the former often rely on them to make the classroom situation work.

The results show that although autistic students wish to have friends, they have difficulties maintaining friendships and understanding the conditions for friendship (e.g., Daniel & Billingsley, 2010 ; O’Hagan & Hebron, 2017). The results highlight the role peers play in inclusive education for autistic students and accepting them [1, 11, 27, 41, 61, 71, 79, 81]. Furthermore, the relationship between parents and teachers is revealed as crucial for positive inclusive education (e.g., Bottema-Beutel et al., 2016 ; Lindsay et al., 2014).

Classroom level

Although the studies at the school level have implications for the classroom, only a small number of the articles (16 of the 108) were based on data collected at the classroom level. Six of the studies investigated environmental sensitivity to better understand the difficulties the students faced regarding participation in classroom activities [39, 63, 64, 65, 73, 84]. As a prominent aspect of autism is difficulties in perception and sensory processing, only six studies are insufficient to contribute adequate knowledge to address this challenge. The research results identify that the environment becomes an issue for the students learning. There is a need for adjusting the school environment—for example, sound and light aspects (e.g., McAllister & Sloan, 2016 ; Pfeiffer et al., 2019 ), which is important to enhance the students’ well-being in the school environment. Still, not enough knowledge is provided regarding a well-founded basis for decisions on how to design learning environments. Howe and Stagg (2016) conducted a study on the sensory experiences of autistic students to enable changes in the school environment that could decrease the negative impact on learning. They found that autistic students experienced various sensory challenges that affected their ability to learn. Pfeiffer et al. (2019) investigated the use of noise-attenuating headphones by autistic students and determined that their participation increased in various contexts, such as at home, at school, and in the community. To examine the potential factors that are important in an autism-friendly classroom, McAllister and Maguire (2012a , 2012b) examined the use of a Classroom Design Kit to make it easier for autistic students to identify what activities should be done in what locations, and to help them organize their schoolwork based on this knowledge. Exploring the use of laptops and tablets by autistic students for schoolwork, Santarosa and Conforto (2016) found that tablets are especially user-friendly tools.

Ten articles addressed content for knowledge development assessable for autistic students in inclusive education [3, 14, 31, 33, 43, 58, 70, 93, 96, 104].

Macdonald et al. (2017) claim that there is an urgent need for interventions to develop results that support autistic students in general education. They studied the implementation of an intervention model and conducted collaborative research ( 2017 ). Stokes et al. (2017) also focused on didactic strategies in the classroom. Their results showed how visual support, structure, concrete instruction, and timetables helped improve learning outcomes. In terms of strategies for physical education (PE), Grenier and Yeaton (2011) revealed that previewing the content of PE lessons with autistic students helped them prepare for participation during classes and that the students developed increased trust in the teacher as a result of this process. Researching the same area, Jones and Block (2006) found that visual support, as well as minimizing extra stimuli, and teacher collaboration improved the experience of autistic students. In terms of reading and writing, Asaro and Saddler (2009) established that self-regulated strategy development increased writing skills by enhancing students’ ability to plan and execute the writing process. Breivik and Hemmingsson (2013) also studied writing in adolescents with Asperger syndrome and found that using a computerized assistive technology device improved writing skills. This is in line with a study by Gentry and Lindsey Lindsey (2012) , whose findings indicated that reading instructions could be adapted to the needs of autistic students via the use of assistive technologies. Multimodal reading ( Oakley et al., 2013 ) was found to be supported by the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) and led to more positive attitudes towards reading in autistic students. Investigating how students experienced reading instructions, Whalon and Hart (2011) found that reading and language arts instruction did not always reflect or meet the individual needs of autistic learners. Symes and Humphrey (2012) compared student inclusion in different lesson groups and determined that autistic students were less frequently included in the lessons than students with dyslexia or those with no special educational needs. A positive learning and social inclusion were also more likely if the other students in the class had received an explanation and understood the diagnosis of the autistic student ( Wastney et al., 2007 ).

Research gaps and need for future research

Most studies have focused on teachers’ attitudes regarding inclusive education and understanding or developing social skills in autistic students. Although this is a very important aspect for powerful inclusive education, results of strategies to teach students with autism in general classrooms are rare. Ten studies were found with a didactical perspective, and by that, we identified a lack of studies that focuses on the didactical aspects of inclusive education. However, Macdonald et al. (2017) is an exception; their study of how to enhance the degree of knowledge development in students is important for raising the future knowledge development for autistic students in general classrooms. And as mentioned before, there is also a limited amount of studies (6) that address the role of sensory challenges in creating inclusive learning environments for autistic students.

Only one study included students with LDs, which reflects the view and limitations of what students we focus on in inclusive educational settings. In this field, students with a combination of autism and ID are not noticed by the found studies. The article which included an autistic student and LD ( Jones & Block, 2006 ) was a study on the inclusivity of PE for an autistic girl.

Teacher assistants play an important role at the classroom level, and as there were only four [25, 83, 95, 97] studies that addressed their situation in some way, there is also a research gap in this area.

The objective of this systematic review was to summarize and synthesize key findings of research results from qualitative analyses, focusing on results of modifications and adaptations at school and classroom levels for autistic students in general educational settings, to support inclusive education. Here, both barriers and facilitators to develop inclusive education were detected. The results point towards a strong focus on strategies at the school level and foremost on implementing positive attitudes in teachers as a strategy to develop inclusive education for autistic students. Developing positive attitudes towards inclusive education is important, and there is a consensus that teacher attitudes are congruent with the effectiveness of inclusive education ( Bolourian et al., 2021 ; Segall & Campbell, 2012) which we also identified. However, beyond positive attitudes, there is a need for finding strategies for the implementation of inclusive education. In agreement with previous research (e.g., Alexander et al., 2015 ; Bölte et al., 2021 ) this synthesis recognizes that not only positive attitudes are needed. A lack of professional development on autism understanding is identified as a barrier for inclusive education and is important for developing strategies to modify and adapt to the learning environment. The findings also support and justify previous systematic reviews focusing on the effect of peers on autistic students ( Cremin et al., 2020 ; Morris et al., 2021 ).

It is important to mention that some studies found that teachers experienced autism traits and severity challenging to educate autistic students in a mainstream classroom (e.g., Humphrey & Lewis, 2008a , 2008b ; Kucharczyk et al., 2015 ) which is a concern and could be a barrier to inclusive education.

The search in this systematic review only captured a few studies at the classroom level as the main source for data collection. As such, there is limited knowledge about how to change and adapt classroom instruction to meet the needs of autistic students. Furthermore, the studies did not focus on the students’ learning development from a didactic perspective. As schools in different parts of our world claim to support should both academic and social development, this is a serious lack of research focus (e.g., the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities).

Furthermore, the systematic review also aimed to investigate to what extent studies consider the students’, families’, and teachers’ viewpoints. The result indicates that the majority (80) of the included articles included the views of staff members, such as teachers and paraprofessionals. Far fewer studies (33) included the views of parents of autistic students. The view of autistic students is represented in combination with other participants’ views in a total of 46 studies. However, fewer (12) studies centered solely on the views of the autistic students themselves. The research gap of how autistic students perceive their school situation can be problematized with the perspective of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child ( 1989 ). This is particularly notable in Article 12, which states that children have the right to be included in decisions regarding their lives. The lack of research including autistic students’ views on inclusion is also found in previous research ( Fayette & Bond, 2018 ).

Limitations

Several limitations can be acknowledged in this review. First, relevant studies may have been excluded because of non-representative titles and/or abstracts. Moreover, only studies written in English were included. Further, grey literature was not included, and this may have excluded some relevant studies that could have provided additional insight. In addition, no manual searches (i.e., via the reference lists of the included studies) were conducted. Although measurements were taken systematically and thoroughly during the abstraction and data extraction process, it is possible that objectivity was comprised in some way. However, efforts to restrict possible bias were conducted through inter-rater reliability testing, and we reached an agreement regarding the inclusion and exclusion criteria before and during the review process. Here, it is important to mention that the calculation of Cohen's kappa resulted in moderate agreement (0.57). This captures that it is quite a challenging task to include only studies with a qualitative methodology. Finally, it is possible that the decision to include only two raters made it easier to reach a consensus when disagreement occurred in the inclusion/exclusion process. Nevertheless, because of the large number of records being screened, especially in the early stages of the process, some mistakes may have occurred.

Implications for practice and conclusion

This study identified the importance of professional development focusing on autism understanding and that there is still a lack of it which may cause a barrier to inclusive education regarding autistic students. This may provide leverage for school officials, especially school leaders/management, to implement professional development programs with autism-specific content. Because of the limited research on how to design inclusive instruction, a special didactic perspective is needed to support teachers’ understanding of the challenges in instruction autistic students encounter. The results demonstrate the need to combine the whole school structure, strategies, and attitudes with classroom-level strategies and content in a holistic approach are important assumptions for the practice. Although general data regarding inclusive education and attitudes towards inclusive education are important areas, more research is needed regarding academic and didactical perspectives. As presented in the introduction, inclusive education requires modifications in the whole school system in terms of structure, strategies, approaches, and pedagogical content (United Nations: General Comment Article 24, 2016 ), each of which should be equally important. Furthermore, in agreement with Macmillan et al. (2021) and Pellicano et al. (2014) , we do identify that there is a need to focus on applied science to contribute to better outcomes for autistic students and to support the practice. To achieve this, it is important to strive to build bridges between research and practice ( Guldberg, 2017 ).

The authors have chosen to use identity-first language i.e., autistic student/s. The is no consensus on the terminology but, several investigations have identified that autistic persons prefer identity-first (Bury et al., 2020; Kenny et al., 2016; Lei et al., 2021).

Supplemental Material

Acknowledgements.

We are grateful for the funding from the Swedish Research Council (Dnr 2017-06039), Also, we would like to thank the research group at Karolinska Institutet for the collaboration in the beginning of the research project. Lastly we would like to thank the reviewers who helped to develop and improve this article

Credit author statement/contribution statement: Linda Petersson-Bloom: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing—Original Draft, Writing—Review & Editing, Mona Holmqvist: Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Writing—Review & Editing, Funding acquisition.

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Vetenskapsrådet (grant number 2017-06039).

ORCID iDs: Linda Petersson-Bloom https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0279-6562

Mona Holmqvist https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8734-1224

Supplemental material: Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Contributor Information

Linda Petersson-Bloom, Faculty of Learning and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden; The National Agency for Special Needs Education and School (SPSM), Sweden.

Mona Holmqvist, Faculty of Learning and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.

• *Able H., Sreckovic M. A., Schultz T. R., Garwood J. D., Sherman J. (2015). Views from the trenches: Teacher and student supports needed for full inclusion of students with ASD . Teacher Education and Special Education , 38 ( 1 ), 44–57. 10.1177/0888406414558096 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alexander J. L., Ayres K. M., Smith K. A. (2015). Training teachers in evidence-based practice for individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A review of the literature . Teacher Education & Special Education , 38 ( 1 ), 13–27. 10.1177/0888406414544551 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Anglim J., Prendeville P., Kinsella W. (2018). The self-efficacy of primary teachers in supporting the inclusion of children with autism spectrum disorder . Educational Psychology in Practice , 34 ( 1 ), 73–88. 10.1080/02667363.2017.1391750 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Asaro K., Saddler B. (2009). Effects of planning instruction on a young writer with Asperger syndrome . Intervention in School and Clinic , 44 ( 5 ), 268–275. 10.1177/1053451208330895 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Ashbee E., Guldberg K. (2018). Using a “collaborative contextual enquiry” methodology for understanding inclusion for autistic pupils in Palestine . Educational Review , 70 ( 5 ), 584–602. 10.1080/00131911.2017.1358153 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Ashby C. (2010). The trouble with normal: The struggle for meaningful access for middle school students with developmental disability labels . Disability & Society , 25 ( 3 ), 345–358. 10.1080/09687591003701249 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Barned N. E., Knapp N. F., Neuharth-Pritchett S. (2011). Knowledge and attitudes of early childhood preservice teachers regarding the inclusion of children with autism spectrum disorder . Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education , 32 ( 4 ), 302–321. 10.1080/10901027.2011.622235 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barnett-Page E., Thomas J. (2009). Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: A critical review . BMC Medical Research Methodology , 9 , 59. 10.1186/1471-2288-9-59 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Beecher C. C., Darragh J. J. (2011). Using literature that portrays individuals with autism with pre-service teachers . The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas , 84 ( 1 ), 21–25. 10.1080/00098655.2010.496811 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bolourian Y., Losh A., Hamsho N., Eisenhower A., Blacher J. (2021). General education teachers’ perceptions of autism, inclusive practices, and relationship building strategies . Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders . 10.1007/s10803-021-05266-4 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bölte S., Leifler E., Berggren S., Borg A. (2021). Inclusive practice for students with neurodevelopmental disorders in Sweden . Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology , 9 , 9–15. 10.21307/sjcapp-2021-002 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Bond C., Hebron J. (2016). Developing mainstream resource provision for pupils with autism spectrum disorder: Staff perceptions and satisfaction . European Journal of Special Needs Education , 31 ( 2 ), 250–263. 10.1080/08856257.2016.1141543 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Bond C., Hebron J., Oldfield J. (2017). Professional learning among specialist staff in resourced mainstream schools for pupils with ASD and SLI . Educational Psychology in Practice , 33 ( 4 ), 341–355. 10.1080/02667363.2017.1324406 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bond C., Symes W., Hebron J., Humphrey N., Morewood G. (2016). Educating persons with autistic spectrum disorder—a systematic review. NCSE Research Reports No. 20.
• *Bottema-Beutel K., Mullins T. S., Harvey M. N., Gustafson J. R., Carter E. W. (2016). Avoiding the “brick wall of awkward”: Perspectives of youth with autism spectrum disorder on social-focused intervention practices . Autism , 20 ( 2 ), 196–206. 10.1177/1362361315574888 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Bradley R. (2016). ‘Why single me out?’ Peer mentoring, autism and inclusion in mainstream secondary schools . British Journal of Special Education , 43 , 272–288. 10.1111/1467-8578.12136 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Breivik I., Hemmingsson H. (2013). Experiences of handwriting and using a computerized ATD in school: Adolescents with Asperger’s syndrome . Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy , 20 ( 5 ), 349–356. 10.3109/11038128.2012.748822 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bury S. M., Jellett R., Hedley D., Spoor J. R. (2020). “It defines who I am” or “it’s something I have”: What language do [autistic] Australian adults [on the autism spectrum] prefer ? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders . 10.1007/s10803-020-04425-3 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Calder L., Hill V., Pellicano E. (2013). ‘Sometimes I want to play by myself’: Understanding what friendship means to children with autism in mainstream primary schools . Autism , 17 ( 3 ), 296–316. 10.1177/1362361312467866 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Carter M., Stephenson J., Clark T., Costley D., Martin J., Williams K., Browne L., Davies L., Bruck S. (2014). Perspectives on regular and support class placement and factors that contribute to success of inclusion for children with ASD . Journal of International Special Needs Education , 17 ( 2 ), 60–69. 10.9782/2159-4341-17.2.60 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chong L. S. H., Fitzgerald D. A., Craig J. C., Manera K. E., Hanson C. S., Celermajer D., Ayer J., Kasparian N. A., Tong A. (2018). Children’s experiences of congenital heart disease: A systematic review of qualitative studies . European Journal of Pediatrics , 177 ( 3 ), 319–336. 10.1007/s00431-017-3081-y [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohen R., Gooberman-Hill R. (2019). Staff experiences of enhanced recovery after surgery: Systematic review of qualitative studies . BMJ open , 9 ( 2 ). 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022259 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Cook A., Ogden J., Winstone N. (2018). Friendship motivations, challenges and the role of masking for girls with autism in contrasting school settings . European Journal of Special Needs Education , 33 ( 3 ), 302–315. 10.1080/08856257.2017.1312797 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Corkum P., Bryson S. E., Smith I. M., Giffen C., Hume K. (2014). Professional development needs for educators working with children with autism spectrum disorders in inclusive school environments . Exceptionality Education International , 24 ( 1 ), 33–47. 10.5206/eei.v24i1.7709 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cremin K., Healy O., Spirtos M., Quinn S. (2020). Autism awareness interventions for children and adolescents: A scoping review . Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities . 10.1007/s10882-020-09741-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (2018). CASP (Qualitative checklist ) .
• Crosland K., Dunlap G. (2012). Effective strategies for the inclusion of children with autism in general education classrooms . Behavior Modification , 36 ( 3 ), 251–269. 10.1177/0145445512442682 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Daniel L. S., Billingsley B. S. (2010). What boys with an autism spectrum disorder say about establishing and maintaining friendships . Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities , 25 ( 4 ), 220–229. 10.1177/1088357610378290 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Dann R. (2011). Secondary transition experiences for pupils with Autistic Spectrum Conditions (ASCs) . Educational Psychology in Practice , 27 ( 3 ), 293–312. 10.1080/02667363.2011.603534 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dargue N., Adams D., Simpson K. (2021). Can characteristics of the physical environment impact engagement in learning activities in children with autism? A systematic review . Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders . 10.1007/s40489-021-00248-9 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Dean M., Adams G. F., Kasari C. (2013). How narrative difficulties build peer rejection: A discourse analysis of a girl with autism and her female peers . Discourse Studies , 15 ( 2 ), 147–166. 10.1177/1461445612471472 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Dillon G. V., Underwood J. D. M., Freemantle L. J. (2016). Autism and the U.K. secondary school experience . Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities , 31 ( 3 ), 221–230. 10.1177/1088357614539833 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Echeita G., Cañadas M., Gutiérrez H., Martínez G. (2021). From cradle to school. The turbulent evolution during the first educational transition of autistic students . Qualitative Research in Education (2014-6418) , 10 ( 2 ). 10.17583/qre.2021.7934 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Eldar E., Talmor R., Wolf-Zukerman T. (2010). Successes and difficulties in the individual inclusion of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in the eyes of their coordinators . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 14 ( 1 ), 97–114. 10.1080/13603110802504150 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Emam M. M., Farrell P. (2009). Tensions experienced by teachers and their views of support for pupils with autism spectrum disorders in mainstream schools . European Journal of Special Needs Education , 24 ( 4 ), 407–422. 10.1080/08856250903223070 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Ezzamel N., Bond C. (2017). The use of a peer-mediated intervention for a pupil with autism spectrum disorder: Pupil, peer and staff perceptions . Educational & Child Psychology , 34 ( 2 ), 27–39. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fayette R., Bond C. (2018). A systematic literature review of qualitative research methods for eliciting the views of young people with ASD about their educational experiences . European Journal of Special Needs Education , 33 ( 3 ), 349–365. 10.1080/08856257.2017.1314111 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Finch K., Watson R., MacGregor C., Precise N. (2013). Teacher needs for educating children with autism spectrum disorders in the general education classroom . Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship , 2 ( 2 ). [ Google Scholar ]
• *Frederickson N., Jones A. P., Lang J. (2010). Inclusive provision options for pupils on the autistic spectrum . Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 10 ( 2 ), 63–73. 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2010.01145.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Gentry J. E., Lindsey P. (2012). Autistic spectrum disorder and assistive technology: Action research case study of reading supports . Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals , 61–87. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1135729.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• *Glashan L., Mackay G., Grieve A. (2004). Teachers’ experience of support in the mainstream education of pupils with autism . Improving Schools , 7 ( 1 ), 49–60. 10.1177/1365480204042113 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodall C. (2019). ‘There is more flexibility to meet my needs’: Educational experiences of autistic young people in mainstream and alternative education provision . Support for Learning , 34 ( 1 ), 4–33. 10.1111/1467-9604.12236 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Grenier M., Yeaton P. (2011). Previewing . Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance , 82 ( 1 ), 28–43. 10.1080/07303084.2011.10598558 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guldberg K. (2017). Evidence-based practice in autism educational research: Can we bridge the research and practice gap? Oxford Review of Education , 43 ( 2 ), 149–161. 10.1080/03054985.2016.1248818 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Guldberg K., Parsons S., Porayska-Pomsta K., Keay-Bright W. (2017). Challenging the knowledge-transfer orthodoxy: Knowledge co-construction in technology-enhanced learning for children with autism . British Educational Research Journal , 43 , 394–413. 10.1002/berj.327 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harden A., Garcia J., Oliver S., Rebecca Rees R., Jonathan Shepherd J., Brunton G., Oakley A. (2004). Applying systematic review methods to studies of people’s views: An example from public health research . Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health , 58 ( 9 ), 794–800. 10.1136/jech.2003.014829 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Hay I., Winn S. (2005). Students with Asperger’s syndrome in an inclusive secondary school environment: Teachers’, parents’, and students’ perspectives . Australasian Journal of Special Education , 29 . 10.1080/1030011050290206 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Hedges S. H., Kirby A. V., Sreckovic M. A., Kucharczyk S., Hume K., Pace S. (2014). “Falling through the cracks”: Challenges for high school students with autism spectrum disorder . The High School Journal , 98 ( 1 ), 64–82. 10.1353/hsj.2014.0014 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Higginson R., Chatfield M. (2012). Together we can do it: A professional development project for regular teachers of children with autism spectrum disorder . Kairaranga , 13 ( 2 ), 29–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• *Howe F., Stagg S. (2016). How sensory experiences affect adolescents with an autistic spectrum condition within the classroom . Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders , 46 ( 5 ), 1656–1668. 10.1007/s10803-015-2693-1 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Humphrey N., Lewis S. (2008a). What does ‘inclusion’ mean for pupils on the autistic spectrum in mainstream secondary schools? Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 8 ( 3 ), 132–140. 10.1111/1471-3802.2008.00115.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Humphrey N., Lewis S. (2008b). ‘Make me normal’: The views and experiences of pupils on the autistic spectrum in mainstream secondary schools . Autism , 12 ( 1 ), 23–46. 10.1177/1362361307085267 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Humphrey N., Symes W. (2010). Responses to bullying and use of social support among pupils with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) in mainstream schools: A qualitative study . Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 10 ( 2 ), 82–90. 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2010.01146.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Jindal-Snape D., Douglas W., Topping K. J., Kerr C., Smith E. F. (2005). Effective education for children with autistic spectrum disorder: Perceptions of parents and professionals . International Journal of Special Education , 20 ( 1 ), 77–87. [ Google Scholar ]
• *Jones K. J., Block M. E. (2006). Including an autistic middle school child in general physical education: A case study . A Journal for Physical and Sport Educators , 19 ( 4 ), 13–16. 10.1080/08924562.2006.10591199 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Jones K., Howley M. (2010). An investigation into an interaction programme for children on the autism spectrum: Outcomes for children, perceptions of schools and a model for training . Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 10 ( 2 ), 115–123. 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2010.01153.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Kamps D. M., Kravits T., Lopez A. G., Kemmerer K., Potucek J., Harrell L. G. (1998). What do the peers think? Social validity of peer-mediated programs . Education and Treatment of Children , 21 ( 2 ), 107–134. [ Google Scholar ]
• *Keane E., Aldridge F. J., Costley D., Clark T. (2012). Students with autism in regular classes: A long-term follow-up study of a satellite class transition model . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 16 ( 10 ), 1001–1017. 10.1080/13603116.2010.538865 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kenny L., Hattersley C., Molins B., Buckley C., Povey C., Pellicano E. (2016). Which terms should be used to describe autism? Perspectives from the UK autism community . Autism , 20 ( 4 ), 442–462. 10.1177/1362361315588200 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Kucharczyk S., Reutebuch C. K., Carter E. W., Hedges S., El Zein F., Gustafson J. R. (2015). Addressing the needs of adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: Considerations and complexities for high school interventions . Exceptional Children , 81 ( 3 ), 329–349. 10.1177/0014402914563703 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Lamb P., Firbank D., Aldous D. (2016). Capturing the world of physical education through the eyes of children with autism spectrum disorders . Sport, Education, and Society , 21 ( 5 ), 698–722. 10.1080/13573322.2014.941794 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Lamont R. (2008). Learning from each other: The benefits of a participatory action research project on the culture, activities and practices of the adults supporting a young child with autism spectrum disorder . Kairaranga , 9 , 38–42. 10.54322/kairaranga.v9i3.134 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Landor F., Perepa P. (2017). Do Resource Bases Enable Social Inclusion of Students with Asperger Syndrome in a Mainstream Secondary School? Support for Learning , 32 ( 2 ), 129–143. 10.1111/1467-9604.12158 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ledford J. R., Hall E., Conder E., Lane J. D. (2016). Research for young children with autism spectrum disorders: Evidence of social and ecological validity . Topics in Early Childhood Special Education , 35 ( 4 ), 223–233. 10.1177/0271121415585956 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lei J., Jones L., Brosnan M. (2021). Exploring an e-learning community’s response to the language and terminology use in autism from two massive open online courses on autism education and technology use . Autism , 25 ( 5 ), 1349–1367. 10.1177/1362361320987963 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Leifler E., Carpelan G., Zakrevska A., Bölte S., Jonsson U. (2020). Does the learning environment “make the grade”? A systematic review of accommodations for children on the autism spectrum in mainstream school . Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy , 1–16. 10.1080/11038128.2020.1832145 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Lewis L., Trushell J., Woods P. (2005). Effects of ICT group work on interactions and social acceptance of a primary pupil with Asperger's Syndrome . British Journal of Educational Technology , 36 , 739–755. 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00504.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Lindsay S., Proulx M., Scott H., Thomson N. (2014). Exploring teachers’ strategies for including children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream classrooms . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 18 ( 2 ), 101–122. 10.1080/13603116.2012.758320 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Lindsay S., Proulx M., Thomson N., Scott H. (2013). Educators’ challenges of including children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream classrooms . International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education , 60 ( 4 ), 347–362. 10.1080/1034912X.2013.846470 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Locke J., Harker C., Wolk C. B., Shingledecker T., Barg F., Mandell D., Beidas R. (2017). Pebbles, rocks, and boulders: The implementation of a school-based social engagement intervention for children with autism . Autism , 21 ( 8 ), 985–994. 10.1177/1362361316664474 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Macdonald L., Keen D., Ashburner J., Costley D., Haas K., Trembath D. (2017). Piloting autism intervention research with teachers in mainstream classrooms . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 21 ( 12 ), 1228–1244. 10.1080/13603116.2017.1335355 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Macmillan C. M., Pecora L. A., Ridgway K., Hooley M., Thomson M., Dymond S., Donaldson E., Mesibov G. B., Stokes M. A. (2021). An evaluation of education-based interventions for students with autism spectrum disorders without intellectual disability: A systematic review . Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders . 10.1007/s40489-021-00289-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maenner M. J., Shaw K. A., Baio J., Washington A., Patrick M., DiRienzo M., Christensen D. L., Wiggins L. D., Dietz P. M., Pettygrove S., Andrews J. G., Lopez M., Hudson A., Baroud T., Schwenk Y., White T., Rosenberg C. R., Lee L.-C., Harrington R. A., … Durkin, M. S. (2020). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 Years-Autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 Sites, United States, 2016 . MMWR Surveillance Summaries , 69 ( 4 ), 1–12. 10.15585/MMWR.SS6904A1 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Maher A. J. (2017). ‘We’ve got a few who don’t go to PE’: Learning support assistant and special educational needs coordinator views on inclusion in physical education in England . European Physical Education Review , 23 ( 2 ), 257–270. 10.1177/1356336X16649938 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Majoko T. (2016). Inclusion of children with autism spectrum disorders: Listening and hearing to voices from the grassroots . Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders , 46 ( 4 ), 1429–1440. 10.1007/s10803-015-2685-1 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Marks S. U., Schrader C., Longaker T., Levine M. (2000). Portraits of three adolescent students with Asperger’s syndrome: Personal stories and how they can inform practice . Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities , 25 ( 1 ), 3–17. 10.2511/rpsd.25.1.3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martin C. S. (2016). Exploring the impact of the design of the physical classroom environment on young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) . Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 16 ( 4 ), 280–298. 10.1111/1471-3802.12092 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *McAllister K., Maguire B. (2012a). Design considerations for the autism spectrum disorder-friendly key stage 1 classroom . Support for Learning , 27 , 103–112. 10.1111/j.1467-9604.2012.01525.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *McAllister K., Maguire B. (2012b). A design model: The autism spectrum disorder classroom design kit . British Journal of Special Education , 39 , 201–208. 10.1111/1467-8578.12006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *McAllister K., Sloan S. (2016). Designed by the pupils, for the pupils: An autism-friendly school . British Journal of Special Education , 43 , 330–357. 10.1111/1467-8578.12160 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *McCollow M., Davis C. A., Copland M. (2013). Creating success for students with autism spectrum disorders and their teachers: Implementing district-based support teams . Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership , 16 ( 1 ), 65–72. 10.1177/1555458913478426 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *McGillicuddy S., O’Donnell G. M. (2014). Teaching students with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream post-primary schools in the Republic of Ireland . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 18 ( 4 ), 323–344. 10.1080/13603116.2013.764934 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *McNerney C., Pellicano E., Hill V. (2015). Choosing a secondary school for young people on the autism spectrum: A multi-informant study . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 19 ( 10 ), 1096–1116. 10.1080/13603116.2015.1037869 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Merry M. S. (2020). Do inclusion policies deliver educational justice for children with autism? An ethical analysis . Journal of School Choice , 14 ( 1 ), 9–25. 10.1080/15582159.2019.1644126 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement . PLoS Medicine , 6 ( 6 ), e1000097. 10.1371/journal.pmed1000097 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morris S., O’Reilly G., Nayyar J. (2021). Classroom-based peer interventions targeting autism ignorance, prejudice and/or discrimination: A systematic PRISMA review . International Journal of Inclusive Education . 10.1080/13603116.2021.1900421 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Moyse R., Porter J. (2015). The experience of the hidden curriculum for autistic girls at mainstream primary schools . European Journal of Special Needs Education , 30 ( 2 ), 187–201. 10.1080/08856257.2014.986915 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nadelson S., Nadelson L. S. (2014). Evidence-based practice article reviews using CASP tools: A method for teaching EBP . Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing , 11 ( 5 ), 344–346. 10.1111/wvn.12059 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Oakley G., Howitt C., Garwood R., Durack A.-R. (2013). Becoming multimodal authors: Pre-service teachers’ interventions to support young children with autism . Australasian Journal of Early Childhood , 38 ( 3 ), 86–96. 10.1177/183693911303800311 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *O'Connor E. (2016). The use of ‘Circle of Friends’ strategy to improve social interactions and social acceptance: A case study of a child with Asperger's Syndrome and other associated needs . Support for Learning , 31 , 138–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.12122 [ Google Scholar ]
• *O’Hagan S., Hebron J. (2017). Perceptions of friendship among adolescents with autism spectrum conditions in a mainstream high school resource provision . European Journal of Special Needs Education , 32 ( 3 ), 314–328. 10.1080/08856257.2016.1223441 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Ochs E., Kremer-Sadlik T., Solomon O., Sirota K. G. (2001). Inclusion as social practice: Views of children with autism . Social Development , 10 ( 3 ), 399–419. 10.1111/1467-9507.00172 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Osborne L. A., Reed P. (2011). School factors associated with mainstream progress in secondary education for included pupils with autism spectrum disorders . Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders , 5 ( 3 ), 1253. 10.1016/j.rasd.2011.01.016 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Parsons S., Guldberg K., MacLeod A., Jones G., Prunty A., Balfe T. (2011). International review of the evidence on best practice in educational provision for children on the autism spectrum . European Journal of Special Needs Education , 26 ( 1 ), 47–63. 10.1080/08856257.2011.543532 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pellicano E., Dinsmore A., Charman T. (2014). What should autism research focus upon? Community views and priorities from the United Kingdom . Autism , 18 ( 7 ), 756–770. 10.1177/1362361314529627 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Peters B. (2016). A model for enhancing social communication and interaction in everyday activities for primary school children with ASD . Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 16 ( 2 ), 89–101. 10.1111/1471-3802.12059 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Poon K. K., Soon S., Wong M.-E., Kaur S., Khaw J., Ng Z., Tan C. S. (2014). What is school like? Perspectives of Singaporean youth with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 18 ( 10 ), 1069–1081. 10.1080/13603116.2012.693401 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Pfeiffer B., Slugg L., Erb S. R. (2019). Impact of noise-attenuating headphones on participation in the home, community, and school for children with autism spectrum disorder . Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics , 39 ( 1 ), 60–76. 10.1080/01411926.2011.580048 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Poonam C. D. (2014). Using social stories for students on the autism spectrum: Teacher perspectives . Pastoral Care in Education , 32 ( 4 ), 284–294. 10.1080/02643944.2014.974662 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Potter C. (2015). “I didn’t used to have much friends”: Exploring the friendship concepts and capabilities of a boy with autism and severe learning disabilities . British Journal of Learning Disabilities , 43 ( 3 ), 208–218. 10.1111/bld.12098 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Ravet J. (2018). ‘But how do I teach them?’: Autism & Initial Teacher Education (ITE) . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 22 ( 7 ), 714–733. 10.1080/13603116.2017.1412505 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Reupert A., Deppeler J. M., Sharma U. (2015). Enablers for inclusion: The perspectives of parents of children with autism spectrum disorder . Australasian Journal of Special Education , 39 ( 1 ), 85–96. 10.1017/jse.2014.17 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Rossetti Z. S., Goessling D. P. (2010). Paraeducators’ Roles in Facilitating Friendships between Secondary Students with and without Autism Spectrum Disorders or Developmental Disabilities . TEACHING Exceptional Children , 42 ( 6 ), 64–70. 10.1177/004005991004200608 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Saggers B. (2015). Student perceptions: Improving the educational experiences of high school students on the autism spectrum . Improving Schools , 18 ( 1 ), 35–45. 10.1177/1365480214566213 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Saggers B., Hwang Y.-S., Mercer K. L. (2011). Your voice counts: Listening to the voice of high school students with autism spectrum disorder . Australasian Journal of Special Education , 35 ( 2 ), 173–190. 10.1375/ajse.35.2.173 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saldaña J. (2014). Coding and analysis strategies. In Leavy P. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 581–605). Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• *Sansosti J. M., Sansosti F. J. (2012). Inclusion for students with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders: Definitions and decision making . Psychology in the Schools , 49 ( 10 ), 917–931. 10.1002/pits.21652 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Santarosa L. M. C., Conforto D. (2016). Educational and digital inclusion for subjects with autism spectrum disorders in 1:1 technological configuration . Computers in Human Behavior , 60 , 293–300. 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.021 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Scheil K. A., Campbell J. M., Bowers-Campbell J. (2017). An initial investigation of the Kit for Kids peer educational program . Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities , 29 ( 4 ), 643–662. 10.1007/s10882-017-9540-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Sciutto M., Richwine S., Mentrikoski J., Niedzwiecki K. (2012). A qualitative analysis of the school experiences of students with Asperger syndrome . Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities , 27 ( 3 ), 177–188. 10.1177/1088357612450511 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Segall M. J., Campbell J. M. (2012). Factors relating to education professionals’ classroom practices for the inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorders . Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders , 6 ( 3 ), 1156–1167. 10.1016/j.rasd.2012.02.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sherwood G. (1999). Meta-synthesis: Merging qualitative studies to develop nursing knowledge . International Journal of Human Caring , 3 ( 1 ), 37–42. 10.20467/1091-5710.3.1.37 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Smith T., Iadarola S., Mandell D. S., Harwood R., Kasari C. (2017). Community-partnered research with urban school districts that serve children with autism spectrum disorder . Academic Pediatrics , 17 ( 6 ), 614–619. 10.1016/j.acap.2017.04.017 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Soilemezi D., Linceviciute S. (2018). Synthesizing qualitative research: Reflections and lessons learnt by two new reviewers . International Journal of Qualitative Methods , 17 ( 1 ). 10.1177/1609406918768014 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Soto-Chodiman R., Pooley J. A., Cohen L., Taylor M. F. (2012). Students with ASD in mainstream primary education settings: Teachers’ experiences in Western Australian classrooms . Australasian Journal of Special Education , 36 ( 2 ), 97–111. 10.1017/jse.2012.10 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Starr E. M., Foy J. B. (2010). In parents’ voices: The education of children with autism spectrum disorders . Remedial and Special Education , 33 ( 4 ), 207–216. 10.1177/0741932510383161 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Starr E. M., Martini T. S., Kuo B. C. H. (2016). Transition to kindergarten for children with autism spectrum disorder: A focus group study with ethnically diverse parents, teachers, and early intervention service providers . Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities , 31 ( 2 ), 115–128. 10.1177/1088357614532497 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Stokes M. A., Thomson M., Macmillan C. M., Pecora L., Dymond S. R., Donaldson E. (2017). Principals’ and teachers’ reports of successful teaching strategies with children with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder . Canadian Journal of School Psychology , 32 ( 3–4 ), 192–208. 10.1177/0829573516672969 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Susinos T., Parrilla Á. (2013). Investigación inclusiva en tiempos difíciles. Certezas provisionales y debates pendientes . REICE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación , 11 ( 2 ), 87–98. https://revistas.uam.es/reice/article/view/2898 [ Google Scholar ]
• *Symes W., Humphrey N. (2011a). School factors that facilitate or hinder the ability of teaching assistants to effectively support pupils with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) in mainstream secondary schools . Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 11 ( 3 ), 153–161. 10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01196.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Symes W., Humphrey N. (2012). Including pupils with autistic spectrum disorders in the classroom: The role of teaching assistants . European Journal of Special Needs Education , 27 ( 4 ), 517–532. 10.1080/08856257.2012.726019 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thomas J., Harden A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews . BMC Medical Research Methodology , 8 , 1–10. 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Taneja Johansson S. (2014). “He is intelligent but different”: Stakeholders’ perspectives on children on the autism spectrum in an urban Indian school context . International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education , 61 ( 4 ), 416–433. 10.1080/1034912X.2014.955786 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Tissot C. (2011). Working together? Parent and local authority views on the process of obtaining appropriate educational provision for children with autism spectrum disorders . Educational Research , 53 ( 1 ), 1–15. 10.1080/00131881.2011.552228 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Tobias A. (2009). Supporting students with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) at secondary school: A parent and student perspective . International Journal of Phytoremediation , 25 ( 2 ), 151–165. 10.1080/02667360902905239 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong A., Palmer S., Craig J. C., Strippoli G. F. M. (2016). A guide to reading and using systematic reviews of qualitative research . Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation , 31 ( 6 ), 897–903. 10.1093/ndt/gfu354 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Tso M., Strnadová I. (2017). Students with autism transitioning from primary to secondary schools: Parents’ perspectives and experiences . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 21 ( 4 ), 389–403. 10.1080/13603116.2016.1197324 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Turnbull A., Edmonson H., Griggs P., Wickham D., Sailor W., Freeman R., Guess D. (2002). A blueprint for schoolwide positive behavior support: Implementation of three components . Exceptional Children , 68 ( 3 ), 377. 10.1177/001440290206800306 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• UN General Assembly (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, A/RES/70/1. https://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html [accessed 20 October 2021]
• United Nations (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). https://www.unicef.org/child-rights-convention/convention-text
• United Nations (2008). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html
• United Nations (UN) (2016). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities: General comment no 4, article 24, right to inclusive education. UN. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/GC.aspx
• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (1994). Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education . UNESCO. [ Google Scholar ]
• Waddington E. M., Reed P. (2017). Comparison of the effects of mainstream and special school on National Curriculum outcomes in children with autism spectrum disorder: An archive-based analysis . Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs , 17 , 132–142. 10.1111/1471-3802.12368 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Wastney B., Kooro-Baker G. T., McPeak C. (2007). Parental suggestions for facilitating acceptance and understanding of autism . Kairaranga , 8 ( 2 ), 15–20. 10.54322/kairaranga.v8i2.99 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Watkins L., O’Reilly M., Ledbetter-Cho K., Lang R., Sigafoos J., Kuhn M., Lim N., Gevarter C., Caldwell N. (2017). A meta-analysis of school-based social interaction interventions for adolescents with autism spectrum disorder . Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders , 4 , 277–293. 10.1007/s40489-017-0113-5 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Whalon K. J., Hart J. E. (2011). Children with autism spectrum disorder and literacy instruction: An exploratory study of elementary inclusive settings . Remedial and Special Education , 32 ( 3 ), 243–255. 10.1177/0741932510362174 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Wong S. (2017). Challenges encountered by 17 autistic young adults in Hong Kong . Support for Learning , 32 ( 4 ), 375–386. 10.1111/1467-9604.12181 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Woodfield C., Ashby C. (2016). “The right path of equality”: Supporting high school students with autism who type to communicate . International Journal of Inclusive Education , 20 ( 4 ), 435–454. 10.1080/13603116.2015.1088581 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• *Young K., Mannix McNamara P., Coughlan B. (2017). Authentic inclusion-utopian thinking?—Irish post-primary teachers’, perspectives of inclusive education . Teaching and Teacher Education , 68 , 1–11. 10.1016/j.tate.2017.07.017 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• < Previous

Home > ACADEMIC_COMMUNITIES > Dissertations & Theses > 701

Antioch University Full-Text Dissertations & Theses

The inclusion of autism spectrum disorder in mainstream classrooms: teachers’ perspectives.

Alyssa Maiuri , Antioch New England Graduate School Follow

Alyssa Maiuri, Psy.D., is a 2021 graduate of the Psy.D. Program in Clinical Psychology at Antioch University, New England

Dissertation Committee:

• Kathi A. Borden, PhD, Committee Chair
• Deidre Brogan, PhD, Committee Member
• JMina Panayoutou-Burbridge, PsyD, Committee Member

autism spectrum disorder, inclusion, general education teachers, IPA

Document Type

Dissertation

Publication Date

This dissertation explored the unique experiences of general education teachers teaching in an inclusive classroom (which will also be referred to as a “mainstream classroom”) with a combination of students with and without autism (which will also be referred to as “autism spectrum disorder” and “ASD”). This was a qualitative research study that applied the Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) research method, as presented by Smith, Flowers, and Larkin (2009). The participants in this study were seven general education teachers, each of whom taught kindergarten or fourth grade. Purposive sampling was used to gain a better understanding of the teachers’ experiences across the elementary school careers of students with autism. Four teachers taught in Massachusetts, two in New Jersey, and one in New York City. Out of the seven participants, three were kindergarten teachers and the remaining four were fourth-grade teachers. Through semi-structured interviews, participants’ experiences were shared. The data analysis involved generating emergent and superordinate themes of teacher perceptions to aid in the understanding of the teachers’ experiences. This study explored whether these experiences differed across grade levels and geographic locations, and how they compared across the full data set. Finally, the findings were discussed in the context of previous literature, what the limitations were to this study, what future directions there were for research on this topic, and my personal reflection.

Alyssa Maiuri

ORCID Scholar ID# 0000-0003-4620-735X

Recommended Citation

Maiuri, A. (2021). The Inclusion of Autism Spectrum Disorder in Mainstream Classrooms: Teachers’ Perspectives. https://aura.antioch.edu/etds/701

Since April 19, 2021

Included in

Clinical Psychology Commons

Antioch University Repository & Archive

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines

AURA provided by Antioch University Libraries

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

College of Education

• Graduate Program

Educational Psychology - M.Ed.

Program overview.

Educational Psychology is an academic program in the Department of Educational Psychology, Leadership, & Counseling. The program equips students with a comprehensive knowledge of learning, motivation, development, and educational foundations. Additionally, students learn to apply quantitative and qualitative research skills in a manner that promotes educational improvement while valuing individual differences. Thus, educational psychology attracts students from various educational and professional backgrounds including education, psychology, human sciences, business, sports sciences, and health sciences.

Request More Information

Program work within Educational Psychology is developed and guided by a strong conceptual framework, the standards from the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), guidelines from the American Psychological Association (APA), American Educational Research Association (AERA), and National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) and the sound professional judgment of an experienced and caring faculty.

The master's program is designed to provide students with content knowledge that facilitates the application of research in educational psychology to educational settings. Teachers are especially encouraged to select the applied master's degree plan that is designed to prepare highly effective, culturally sensitive educators.

Degrees Offered

M.Ed., offered as a face-to-face or hybrid program.

Career Opportunities With This Degree

Most graduates teach in colleges or universities or are in positions conducting research.

Application Materials

College Transcripts – Unofficial transcripts can be uploaded to the Graduate School application . Information on submitting official transcripts will be provided to you by the Graduate School. Grade reports or unofficial transcripts from university web portals will not be accepted. Please redact the Social Security Number anywhere it appears on your transcript. If documents are written in a language other than English, a copy of a complete and official English translation must be provided with the original language records.

Required Supplemental Application Materials

GRE Scores, Resume, Three Professional Recommendations, Academic Writing Sample, Response to Applicant Statement Prompt. Download a comprehensive list of requirements.

Application Process

Please visit the Graduate Application Process for more information on how to apply.

This program requires official GRE scores. Scores must no more than 5 years old at the time of application. Official GRE scores must be sent from Educational Testing Services (ETS) to the Texas Tech Graduate School. To register for the examination please visit the GRE Testing website . Texas Tech University's code is 6827.

• Due to ongoing accessibility concerns, the Graduate School has suspended GRE test score requirements for applications through at least Summer 2025. For more information, please contact the Graduate School .

Semester in which the program can be started

It is recommended that students start in the fall but applications will be considered on a rolling basis.

Estimated Hours to Completion

45 credit hours

Allowable Transfer Hours

6 credit hours if completed in the last 7 years with a grade of B or better.

Financial Aid

TTU Graduate School and COE scholarships, research assistantships, student loans

To be competitive for funding support, the recommended deadline for Fall is December 1 st . However, applications received at other times will be reviewed.

Tuition & Fees

Use the Student Business Services Tuition Estimator to estimate your costs.

Chance Webb Academic Advisor/Admissions Office of Graduate Admissions & Enrollment [email protected] 806-834-6768

Research, Evaluation, Measurement, and Statistics

Educational psychology and foundations, school psychology.

• Delivery : Face-to-Face or Hybrid
• Hours to Completion: 45
• Now accepting applications for: All Semesters
• Maximum Transfer Hours: 6

Contact TTU

• Like College of Education on Facebook Like College of Education on Facebook
• Follow College of Education on X (twitter) Follow College of Education on X (twitter)
• Subscribe to College of Education on YouTube Subscribe to College of Education on YouTube
• Follow College of Education on Instagram Follow College of Education on Instagram

• community journalist

Pa. student & mom use their voices to advocate for autism appreciation

BERWYN, Pennsylvania (WPVI) -- 11-year-old Grayson Arbutina, who communicates with an augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) device, and his mom created a clothing line that inspires people with autism to use their voices.

Through 'Grayson Says Designs,' they create t-shirts inspired by the icons from Arbutina's AAC device. They spread positive messages such as 'Say it any way you can.'

Today, the mom-and-son-duo appeared at The Timothy School's 2nd Annual Community Day, featuring food, carnival games, and vendors.

The Timothy School, where Arbutina is a student, is specially designed to give students with autism the tools they need to succeed.

The event raises funds for the school, which has a long-term plan to construct a new learning facility.

To learn more about Grayson Says Designs or The Timothy School , visit their websites.

RELATED: Baseball players buddy up with athletes of all abilities in 'The Miracle League'

Related Topics

• COMMUNITY & EVENTS
• TREDYFFRIN TOWNSHIP
• COMMUNITY JOURNALIST

Community Journalist

Two Ukrainian students become part of Stockton University family

Pa. woman provides warm quilts for children in need across the country

New book captures the beauty of the 'Private Gardens of Philadelphia'

Residents of Glassboro fill the streets for a Memorial Day parade

Top stories.

Crews respond to large junkyard fire in Philadelphia | VIDEO

Man shot by Del. trooper after allegedly threatening others with gun

• 3 hours ago

Suspect accused of stealing car with young girl inside in Philadelphia

'I liked this school': University of the Arts announces abrupt closure

• 2 hours ago

Trump's felony convictions likely bring restrictions for his rights

1 dead, 5 injured after three vehicle hit-and-run crash in Philly

Police searching for suspects after double shooting in Powelton

AccuWeather: More Clouds, Mild Sunday

The Impact and Significance of Brown V. Board of Education

This essay is about the significance of the Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education, which fundamentally changed public education and civil rights in the United States. The case challenged the “separate but equal” doctrine that justified racial segregation, demonstrating that segregated schools were inherently unequal. The Court’s unanimous decision overturned Plessy v. Ferguson, declaring that segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This ruling inspired further civil rights activism and legal reforms. Despite resistance and slow implementation, Brown v. Board of Education remains a cornerstone of American civil rights history, highlighting the judiciary’s role in advancing equality and justice.

How it works

The judicial milestone of Brown v. Board of Education, rendered in 1954, emerges as a quintessential juncture in the annals of American legal chronicles. This landmark litigation not only reshaped the terrain of public education but also assumed a pivotal role in the broader spectrum of the Civil Rights Movement. To fathom its import, it behooves us to plunge into the era’s milieu, the legal discourse articulated, and the profound societal reverberations it elicited.

During the nascent 1950s, the United States found itself starkly cleaved along racial lines.

Segregation stood as the norm, particularly entrenched in the southern states, where the principle of “separate but equal” undergirded the legal rationale justifying spatial partitioning, notably in educational institutions. This doctrine, emanating from the Supreme Court’s 1896 pronouncement in Plessy v. Ferguson, posited that racial segregation remained constitutionally permissible as long as parity was ostensibly maintained in segregated facilities. Yet, stark disparities belied this facade, glaringly evident in public schools where black pupils often received instruction in decrepit edifices with antiquated resources and scant funding.

The litigation commonly recognized as Brown v. Board of Education crystallized from the amalgamation of five discrete cases spanning Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, and Washington D.C. These litigations were initiated by black families contesting the constitutional legitimacy of segregated public schooling. Advocated by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, with Thurgood Marshall at the helm, the litigants contended that segregation intrinsically sowed inequality and transgressed the Equal Protection Clause enshrined within the Fourteenth Amendment. Marshall and his cohort marshaled compelling evidence, including the seminal psychological research of Dr. Kenneth Clark, illustrating how segregation wrought psychological trauma upon black children, fostering sentiments of inferiority with enduring ramifications.

The pronouncement handed down by the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education was resoundingly unanimous. Pronounced by Chief Justice Earl Warren, the edict decreed that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal,” thereby annulling Plessy v. Ferguson and obliterating the legal scaffoldings sustaining segregation. This adjudication assumed monumental proportions not merely for its addressal of the specific scourge of public school segregation but also for its connotative commitment to civil liberties and egalitarian ethos underpinning the law.

The ramifications of Brown v. Board of Education transcended the precincts of education. It served as a fulcrum catalyzing activism and legal skirmishes that kindled the embers of the Civil Rights Movement. This adjudication galvanized endeavors aimed at extirpating segregation from other public domains, while furnishing a juridical scaffolding for contesting discriminatory practices. It underscored the judiciary’s pivotal role in safeguarding individual liberties and ensuring parity under the law. The adjudication spotlighted the judiciary’s efficacy as a potent engine of societal metamorphosis, endowed with the capacity to redress entrenched injustices.

However, the implementation of the Brown decree was met with vehement opposition, notably in the southern bastions. Numerous states resorted to stratagems aimed at forestalling or subverting desegregation, precipitating a succession of legal entanglements and federal interventions. For instance, the integration of Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, in 1957 necessitated federal troop deployments to enforce the Court’s decree. Instances such as these underscored the tenacious grip of racial bias and the Herculean obstacles confronting the attainment of genuine parity.

Notwithstanding these hurdles, Brown v. Board of Education endures as an indelible cornerstone of American civil liberties. Its legacy is manifest in ongoing endeavors aimed at ameliorating educational disparities and fostering inclusivity in schools. The adjudication established the axiom that state-sanctioned segregation is antithetical to the principles of equality and justice enshrined in the Constitution. It erected a milepost for future legal skirmishes against discrimination, exerting a palpable influence on subsequent Supreme Court pronouncements touching upon issues ranging from suffrage to affirmative action.

Among the most salient impacts of Brown was its catalytic role in reshaping public perceptions concerning race and equality. The adjudication furnished a robust legal and moral imprimatur affirming the intrinsic wrongness of segregation, effectuating a paradigmatic shift in the national discourse on race. It infused momentum into the Civil Rights Movement, precipitating legislative landmarks such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, instrumental in dismantling institutionalized racism and broadening civil liberties protections for all Americans.

The ramifications of the Brown decree likewise reverberated within the legal fraternity and the judiciary. Thurgood Marshall’s triumph in Brown propelled him to national eminence, culminating in his investiture as the inaugural African American Supreme Court Justice in 1967. His advocacy in Brown and other civil rights litigations laid the groundwork for succeeding generations of minority legal practitioners and jurists, fostering a more diverse and representative judicial architecture.

In the intervening decades since Brown, the pursuit of educational equity has endured. While the adjudication eviscerated the juridical edifice sustaining segregation, numerous schools persist in de facto segregation owing to factors like residential stratification and socioeconomic disparities. Efforts aimed at redressing these disparities have encompassed busing initiatives, affirmative action protocols, and endeavors aimed at augmenting funding and resources for underserved educational precincts. These endeavors underscore the perennial challenge of realizing the promise of Brown within an intricate and evolving societal fabric.

In recent epochs, the precepts espoused in Brown have been invoked in legal battles pertaining to issues such as affirmative action, educational funding, and the rights of LGBTQ+ students. The adjudication persists as a lodestar animating discussions concerning equity and justice in education. Its enduring relevance underscores the imperativeness of vigilance and activism in the pursuit of civil liberties, reminding us that the quest for parity is an ongoing odyssey necessitating perpetual commitment and exertion.

Brown v. Board of Education was consequential for its foundational challenge and dismantlement of the legal scaffolding buttressing racial segregation in public schooling. The adjudication bore profound implications for the broader civil liberties milieu, inspiring activism and legal overhauls aimed at realizing heightened racial parity. While the trajectory toward desegregation and commensurate educational opportunities has been strewn with impediments, the legacy of Brown persists in shaping the pursuit of justice and equality in America. This landmark pronouncement stands as a poignant testimonial to the judiciary’s capacity to drive societal metamorphosis and safeguard individual liberties, underscoring the dictum that all individuals, irrespective of race, merit equitable protection under the law.

Cite this page

The Impact and Significance of Brown v. Board of Education. (2024, Jun 01). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-impact-and-significance-of-brown-v-board-of-education/

"The Impact and Significance of Brown v. Board of Education." PapersOwl.com , 1 Jun 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-impact-and-significance-of-brown-v-board-of-education/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Impact and Significance of Brown v. Board of Education . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-impact-and-significance-of-brown-v-board-of-education/ [Accessed: 2 Jun. 2024]

"The Impact and Significance of Brown v. Board of Education." PapersOwl.com, Jun 01, 2024. Accessed June 2, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-impact-and-significance-of-brown-v-board-of-education/

"The Impact and Significance of Brown v. Board of Education," PapersOwl.com , 01-Jun-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-impact-and-significance-of-brown-v-board-of-education/. [Accessed: 2-Jun-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Impact and Significance of Brown v. Board of Education . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-impact-and-significance-of-brown-v-board-of-education/ [Accessed: 2-Jun-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers