special education research projects

Special Education Research Accelerator

Welcome to SERA!

The special education research accelerator (sera) is a platform for conducting crowdsourced studies related to special education..

The long-term vision for SERA is to develop a validated infrastructure, procedures, and affiliated network of special education researchers to conduct high-quality, large-scale, and open replication studies with diverse samples to address critical questions in the field.

Replication Studies

The SERA infrastructure is built around prospectively designed dataflow and workflows to allow for reproducibility. Our online data portal provides comprehensive access to resources for our research partners.

Research Partnerships

SERA is a platform for conducting crowdsourced studies related to special education, in which data are collected across multiple research sites by multiple research partners.

Project Highlights

SERA2: Identifying Generalization Boundaries

SERA2 will expand SERA by developing and piloting procedures and supports for crowdsourcing the development of lines of inquiry to systematically investigate effect…

Continue Reading SERA2: Identifying Generalization Boundaries

SERA Pilot Study Internal Review: UNCW Research Team

One of the seven research teams we worked with throughout the SERA Pilot Study was the team at University of North Carolina Wilmington…

Continue Reading SERA Pilot Study Internal Review: UNCW Research Team

Meet Sheila Conway!

Sheila Conway, Ph.D is an Associate Professor of Practice in the University of Pittsburgh School of Education.

Continue Reading Meet Sheila Conway!

Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology & Special Education

• Educational Psychology and Educational Technology
• Measurement and Quantitative Methods
• Rehabilitation Counseling
• School Psychology
• Special Education
• International Students
• University Graduate Certification in College Teaching
• Faculty and Staff by Program Area
• Staff Directory
• Available Positions
• Graduate Forms
• Scholarships/Fellowships
• Campus & Community Resources
• Graduate Assistantships
• Department Bylaws

Special Education Ph.D.

• Special Ed Home
• Special Education Undergraduate
• M.A Applied Behavior Analysis
• M.A ABA-ASD
• Apply to the M.A
• M.A Handbook
• M.A Degree Requirements
• Graduate Certificate
• Faculty & Staff
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Apply to the Program
• About the Program
• Requirements
• Autism Spectrum Disorders Endorsement
• Learning Disabilities Endorsement
• Practicum Requirements
• Autism Spectrum Disorders Handbook
• Learning Disabilities Handbook
• Orientation
• Program Requirements
• Ph.D Handbook
• Faculty Research

Special Education Faculty Research & Projects

Emily bouck.

Dr. Emily Bouck’s research focuses on (a) in-school supports for students with disabilities in terms of achievement and outcomes, both academics and life skills, and (b) the relationship between in-school supports and services and post-school outcomes for students with disabilities. Emily’s research regarding in-school supports emphases technology – both technology as an accommodation (e.g., a calculator and text-to-speech) as well as technology as a means of instructional delivery (e.g., an iPad to deliver life skills instruction on grocery shopping and digital textbooks). Emily’s research involving the relationship between in-school supports and services and post-school outcomes primarily comprises her secondary analyses of the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 ( NLTS2 ).

Dr. Bouck’s current project include:

• Secondary data analysis of the NLTS2 relative to exploring (a) post-school services received by secondary students with mild intellectual disability and the relationship between receipt of those services and post-school outcomes, (b) post-school outcomes of students with autism spectrum disorder, and (c) the receipt of in-school services and supports by students with intellectual disability across elementary and secondary education

• Secondary data analysis exploring the relationship between accommodation provision and student achievement on standardized assessments

• Comparing app-based virtual and concrete manipulatives in supporting elementary-aged students with autism spectrum disorder

• Exploring calculators as an accommodation to support secondary students with disabilities in mathematics classes

Matthew Brodhead

Matthew T. Brodhead is a Board Certified Behavior Analyst whose research examines behavioral determinants of response variability, choice and independent social skills in children with autism. He is also interested in research and conceptual issues relating to the ethical and professional behavior of practicing behavior analysts. He is on the editorial boards of The Analysis of Verbal Behavior and the Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. Through workshops and consultation, he has established multiple school-based programs for children with autism, and he has provided training to teachers, related service providers and behavior analysts throughout the United States.

Eunsoo Cho’s research focuses on statistical modeling of reading development in students with or at-risk for having learning disabilities, including students from language minority backgrounds. Her research has two strands: First, she is interested in developing and validating assessment methods to accurately identify students with learning disabilities within a multitiered support system, such as response to intervention (RTI). Second, her research focuses on understanding psychological and motivational processes involved in learning. She intends to develop a motivation intervention that can be combined with reading instruction for students with persistent reading difficulties. One of her co-authored articles in Reading Research Quarterly received the 2015 Albert J. Harris Award from the International Literacy Association. In 2016, she received the Samuel Kirk Award for best research article from the Division of Learning Disabilities of the Council for Exceptional Children. She is also a faculty affiliate in the Educational Psychology and Educational Technology (EPET) program.

Marisa Fisher

http://marisahfisher.weebly.com/

In Their Own Words: Understanding Peer Experiences for People with Disabilities

Individuals with disabilities are 1 to 1.5 times more likely to experience peer victimization compared to the national average (Blake et al., 2012). Individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) experience higher rates of victimization (57%) compared to those with autism spectrum disorder (46%), speech/language impairment (47%), and learning disabilities (49%; Sterzing et al., 2012). While these data make it relatively clear that individuals with ID are more likely to experience peer victimization, less information is available concerning the specific experiences of victimization they face or the ways they respond. Previous studies examining peer victimization have often relied on parent/teacher report or self-report questionnaires. While these questionnaires assist with determining the prevalence of victimization, they do not provide details about the specific experiences of victimization. This study addresses the need to understand the experiences of peer victimization faced by individuals with ID, through conducting individualized interviews. These interviews will ask participants with ID to discuss their friendships, specific instances of bullying or victimization that they have experienced, ways in which they responded, and ways they acted to protect themselves from future situations. The goal of this project is to better understand the specific bullying experiences faced by youth with disabilities and to understand how they respond to these situations. I will then work with these youth to develop ways to decrease bullying.

Principal Investigators: Marisa Fisher and Megan Griffin (University of New Mexico)

Exploring the LINKS Experience in High School

Many public high schools across Michigan participate in a program called Peer to Peer, in which students without disabilities are paired with students with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and other disabilities to help support these students in general education classrooms. In this study, I conduct focus groups with students who serve as LINKS to students with ASD to better understand the experiences of serving as a peer support for students with ASD. Students without disabilities participate in group interviews about why they chose to be in the program and what they have experienced since starting the Peer to Peer Program. Questions focus on attitudes toward individuals with ASD and other disabilities, experiences they’ve had with students with ASD and other disabilities in the classroom, negative interactions they may have witnessed between other students without disabilities toward the students with ASD and other disabilities, and the benefits they have experienced through being in the Peer to Peer Program. This research will help us to understand how the Peer to Peer Program helps to change attitudes toward students with disabilities and will help us to better understand experiences of victimization toward students with disabilities, as witnessed by their typically developing peers.

Principal Investigator: Marisa Fisher 

Comparing Sociability in Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

Compared to those without disabilities, some individuals with disabilities are said to be extremely social, with an overwhelming desire to walk up to and talk to strangers; while others are said to avoid social interactions. The social behaviors of some people might lead them to be more or less socially vulnerable and at risk of exploitation. This study compares the social behaviors and vulnerabilities of individuals with and without disabilities. The purpose of the study is to better understand the social behaviors of people with and without disabilities as perceived and reported by their parents/guardians. This is an online study, in which parents/caregivers are asked to fill out questionnaires about their son/daughter’s background, social behaviors, and how their son/daughter does in different social situations. These questionnaires take about 30 minutes to complete. If you are interested in participating, please click here to access to the Approachability and Sociability Questionnaire.

For more information contact  Marisa Fisher

Troy Mariage

Dr. Mariage has recently participated in two research projects with Dr. Carol Sue Englert and Dr. Cynthia Okolo that have examined content area literacy instruction in inclusive middle grade classrooms. The focus of both projects has been to develop curricular interventions that support teachers and their students as they engage with rigorous content. On the ACCEL Project, teachers utilized evidenced-based interventions related to at least four areas of intervention research:

• learning-to-learn strategies for accessing curriculum,
• cognitive strategies for comprehending and composing expository text,
• text structures as thinking devices,
• pedagogical approaches to support socio-cognitive apprenticeships in classrooms.

Special attention is paid to developing intervention fidelity in instructional settings that emphasize the orchestration of multi-component frameworks across an entire inquiry process. The ACCELerate Project then extends the ACCEL project by moving the elements of the curricular approach to a web-based environment. Finally, Dr. Mariage is continuing his work on cultural elements related to schools as learning organizations for all their inhabitants. This study examines the notion of school re-culturing from sociocultural and critical perspectives.

Joshua Plavnick

The Early Learning Institute

The Early Learning Institute (ELI) is an early intensive behavioral intervention program for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) located within the renowned Child Development Laboratory Preschool. The Early Learning Institute offers intensive 1:1 instruction, dyadic or small group instruction, and inclusive behavior analytic instruction, where children with ASD can learn and generalize skills among their neurotypical peers. The ELI curriculum targets pivotal developmental milestones including imitation, joint attention, observational learning, social initations, functional communication, play, and independence, as well as early academic skills including language, early literacy and numeracy, matching, and group learning. In addition to examining the overall efficacy of the ELI curriculum, the Institute is home to several applied intervention research studies investigating methods to assess and teach observational learning repertoires, optimal approaches to language instruction, strategies for increasing physical activity, and procedures for training parents to administer naturalistic behavioral interventions to children.  

Investigators: Josh Plavnick, Kate LaLonde, Marisa Fisher, Kristin Rispoli, & Brooke Ingersoll

Doctoral Research Assistant: Ana Duenas

Undergraduate Research Assistants: Anjana Nair & Erica Lydey

Computer-based Reading Instruction for Children with ASD

Learning to read is a critical skill for children, though reading instruction is often under-emphasized for children with moderate to severe autism spectrum disorders (ASD). In addition, very little is known about how these children interact with text or how reading instruction may need to be modified and adapted to meet their needs. The purpose of this project is to administer daily reading curricula, consisting of computer-based and teacher-led instruction, to children with moderate to severe ASD. Researchers will use state-of-the-art technologies to evaluate the effects of the reading program on participants’ reading engagement, performance, and related outcomes.

Investigators: Josh Plavnick, Julie Thompson, Carol Sue Englert, Troy Mariage, & Lori Skibbe

Doctoral Research Assistant: Savana Bak

Undergraduate Research Assistant: Hannah Goodell

Tiffany Stauch

Tiffany Stauch is a fixed term assistant professor of special education and Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA). Her research interests include ways to support individuals with disabilities in work place settings as well as the use application of video modeling to teach complex skills to adolescents with autism. Most recently, she investigated the use of video modeling to teach vocational skills and work related social skills to adolescents with autism. She is also interested in methods to promote generalization of skills, such as matrix training, multiple exemplar training, and programming common stimuli.

Green & White Blog

Dr. Gary Troia, with colleagues Froma Roth and Colleen Worthington, has authored a phonological awareness intervention program for young at risk children and children with disabilities called Promoting Awareness of Speech Sounds (PASS), published by Attainment Company. This program is the culmination of a decade of development and research in clinical and school settings. Watch the video below to learn more about PASS!

Dr. Troia is completing a five-year project funded by the U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences that examines the content of states’ writing standards and assessments, how well that content reflects evidence-based writing instruction and assessment practices, the degree to which state standards and assessments converge with the new Common Core State Standards for writing and language and the next generation assessments for the core standards, and the degree to which alignment between the content of state standards and assessments predicts writing performance of 8th graders on the National Assessment of Educational Progress when controlling for state and student demographic variables and classroom instruction variables. Two recent Green & Write blog posts describe some of this work:

• http://education.msu.edu/green-and-write/2015/alignment-of-state-standards-and-assessments-of-writing/
• https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gary_Troia

Adrea Truckenmiller

Research interests

Adrea Truckenmiller’s research interests broadly include adolescent literacy, writing assessment and data-based decision-making for instruction. Her previous funded projects explored the relation between important component skills of literacy and processes for identifying all students’ instructional needs. Currently, Truckenmiller is investigating the feedback loop between writing instruction and formative assessment of writing.

Charis L. Wahman

Charis L. Wahman is a Board Certified Behavior Analyst whose research bridges special education, general education, and applied behavioral analysis to address the social, behavioral, and emotional needs of young children. Within the framework of Positive Behavior Support (PBS), she conducts empirical research to examine active teaching approaches that promote young children’s agency in early childhood classrooms as well as families’ experiences supporting young children with social and emotional concerns. Currently, she is examining families’ and teachers’ perceptions of children’s social and emotional adjustment and the social and emotional practices implemented across home and school contexts. To learn more about Dr. Wahman and her research, please visit:  www.charislaurenwahman.com

Special Education Resource Project

Welcome to the Special Education Resource Teacher Project.  This website is designed for special education teachers looking to elevate their practice through evidence-based practices and research driven instruction.  This site provides information for special education teachers on a variety of topics.  Along with information, this site provides resources for teachers including state and local education agencies, access to research and information on evidence-based practices.

Click on a tile below to access information and resources. 

A Pitch for Improving Special Education

• Posted June 2, 2021
• By Andrew Bauld
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Entrepreneurship
• Evidence-Based Intervention
• Learning Differences and Accessibility

In the United States alone, more than 2 million students struggle with a specific learning disability (SLD), representing roughly 35% of all students who receive special education services. And yet coordination is often lacking between the experts working with these students, including classroom teachers, doctors, and policymakers.

But students in a pair of new HGSE modules are combining their special education expertise with entrepreneurship to invent new interventions to make care a more collaborative effort.  

Created by Associate Professor Nadine Gaab , the two courses, Serving Children with Learning & Developmental Differences: Policymaking & Systems-Level Translation & Coordination and Children with Learning and Developmental Differences: A Vision for Community Supports and Service Implementation, were designed to give students an opportunity to challenge and redesign the current special educational landscape.  

“I created these two new modules to fill a gap looking at policymaking and system system-level translation in the educational learning disabilities setting as well as in the community setting,” Gaab says. “The goal was for students to become change makers on the micro and macro levels and to walk out feeling empowered."

In the first module, students looked at why individuals who work with SLD students, from special educators to speech and language pathologists to pediatricians, are often siloed in their approach to care and devised practical solutions for more coordinated efforts. In the second module, students created ways to support SLD students outside the classroom through community-level interventions and solutions.

In addition to her academic research, Gaab is also an entrepreneur, developing new EdTech tools for screening reading difficulties like dyslexia through her company EarlyBird Education. Gaab says she wanted students to step out of their comfort zone and think about applying their learning in practical ways that could lead to real world solutions.

“In the first part of the module, I wanted them to walk away with a pitch they could apply for all these challenges they were learning about. For the other module, targeted for community stakeholders, I wanted them to think about how they could present their ideas on the local level, presenting to mayors or school committees,” Gaab says.

Working in small teams, students developed an innovative project outline to address a specific challenge through the use of a variety of interventions, from an app connecting volunteer special education advocates with families to help navigate the IEP process to an outreach campaign to increase awareness of learning differences in rural China.   

Lexi Iverson, Ed.M.’21, created an app to close the gap between general educators and special educators. As a former special educator and department lead in the middle and high school setting, Iverson knew the challenges that existed firsthand.

“Currently in many schools, information is siloed, which means that students are not being successfully accommodated in many of their classes,” Iverson says. “Our app provides foundational knowledge, assessments to collect data, and the opportunity to earn continuing learning credits, often required for renewing teacher licenses.”

Growing up with a learning disability herself, Giulia Travostino, Ed.M. ’21, saw how frustrating it could be navigating diagnoses from the student perspective. Travostino and her project partner came up with the idea for a web-based communications platform to provide resources directly to children with disabilities.

“When it comes to disability, children deserve to be informed and know about their brains — after all, their disability will impact them the most,” Travostino says. “Websites and books that are for caretakers tend to speak over children and ignore the fact that they are the person living with this disability.”

Gaab says she was impressed by all the pitches and could see many of them being implemented and making an immediate impact. Students say they left the class not only with fully formed pitches and an understanding of how to access potential funders but also the feeling of being empowered to make system level change.

“I was inspired by the support I received from Dr. Gaab,” Travostino says. “Having a faculty member go out of their way to assure you that your idea could live outside of class was incredibly validating. I also have more confidence in my voice, and I learned that my lived experience carries weight and is valuable.” 

The latest research, perspectives, and highlights from the Harvard Graduate School of Education

Related Articles

The Seekers

Every Child Has a Voice

Building social-emotional learning skills through the arts

Food for Thought

200 Good Research Topics For Special Education: Best Guide

In today’s blog, we will discuss the research topics for special education students. Quality research is critical to improving special education and helping students with disabilities thrive. Many vital areas still need to be studied further. 

Some top research priorities include developing better ways to identify disabilities early on, testing teaching methods and tools that meet diverse learning needs, using technology to assist students, promoting inclusion in mainstream classrooms, and training teachers to adapt curriculum. 

It manages special needs classrooms, understanding differences across disability types, improving communication between families and schools, reducing bullying, and continuously evaluating programs to address gaps in support. Research that uncovers what works versus what doesn’t will allow educators to serve each student better. 

While progress has been made, through ongoing research, we can gain new insights and strategies that will optimize the learning experience and future success for students with special needs. This blog post will explore promising research topics in special education that could make a significant impact.

Importance of Research in Special Education

Table of Contents

Here are some reasons why research is vital in special education:

• Helps teachers learn new teaching methods and tools that work best for students with disabilities. This gives teachers more ideas to try in the classroom.
• Finds better and earlier ways to identify disabilities so students can get the help they need sooner.
• Creates new technologies to help students in the classroom and at home.
• Looks at how schools, families, and communities can best support students with disabilities. This helps improve special education programs.
• Teaches more about different types of disabilities so teachers know how to precisely help each student’s needs.
• Tracks how students do after graduating to see what more can be done to help their transition to adulthood.

In short, research improves special education and outcomes for students with disabilities. It provides teachers with the knowledge and tools to help their students be successful. Research is crucial for making special education effective and helping all students thrive.

200 Research Topics For Special Education

Here are some research topics for special education students:

Inclusive Education Research Topics For Special Education

• Implementing Inclusive Practices in Mainstream Classrooms
• The Impact of Inclusive Education on Social Skills Development
• Teacher Training for Inclusive Classrooms
• Enhancing Accessibility in Inclusive Education Settings
• Parental Involvement in Inclusive Education Programs
• The Major Role of Assistive Technology in Inclusive Classrooms
• Promoting Positive Attitudes Towards Inclusion among Students
• Addressing Bullying in Inclusive Education Environments
• Inclusive Physical Education for Students with Disabilities
• Evaluating the Effectiveness of Inclusive Education Policies

Learning Disabilities Research Topics For Special Education

• Identifying and Supporting Students with Dyslexia
• Techniques for Teaching Mathematics to Students with Learning Disabilities
• Assistive Technology for Students with Learning Disabilities
• Addressing Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in the Classroom
• Effective Reading Interventions for Pupils with Learning Disabilities
• Social-Emotional Learning for Students with Learning Disabilities
• Executive Functioning Skills and Learning Disabilities
• Cognitive Behavioral Interventions for Students with Learning Disabilities
• Differentiated Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities
• Transition Planning for Students with Learning Disabilities

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Research Topics For Special Education

• Early Intervention Strategies for Children with Autism
• Social Skills Training for Students with Autism
• Inclusive Extracurricular Activities for Students with Autism
• Communication Interventions for Non-Verbal Students with Autism
• Classroom Modifications for Students with Autism
• Sensory Integration Strategies for Students with Autism
• Peer Support Programs for Students with Autism
• Technology-Based Interventions for Students with Autism
• Parental Involvement in Autism Education Programs
• Inclusive Practices for Adolescents with Autism

Behavioral Disorders Research Topics For Special Education

• Positive Behavior Support in Special Education
• Strategies for Managing Disruptive Behavior in the Classroom
• Implementing Restorative Justice in Special Education Settings
• Functional Behavior Assessments for Individualized Intervention
• School-Wide Behavior Management Systems
• Social Skills Training for Pupils with Behavioral Disorders
• Role of School Counselors in Addressing Behavioral Issues
• Collaborative Approaches with Parents in Behavior Interventions
• Culturally Responsive Behavior Interventions
• Inclusive Extracurricular Activities for Students with Behavioral Disorders

Gifted Education Research Topics For Special Education

• Differentiated Instruction for Gifted Students
• Social-Emotional Needs of Gifted Students
• Acceleration Strategies in Gifted Education
• Mentoring Programs for Gifted Students
• Creativity and Critical Thinking in Gifted Education
• Addressing Underrepresentation in Gifted Education Programs
• Parental Support for Gifted Students
• Inquiry-Based Learning for Gifted Students
• Dual Enrollment Opportunities for Gifted Students
• Talent Development Programs in Special Education

Speech and Language Disorders Research Topics For Special Education

• Early Intervention for Speech and Language Delays
• Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) for Non-Verbal Students
• Classroom Strategies for Supporting Language Development
• Collaborative Approaches with Speech-Language Pathologists
• Literacy Interventions for Students with Language Disorders
• Cultural Competence in Speech and Language Services
• Technology-Based Approaches for Speech Therapy
• Parental Involvement in Speech and Language Interventions
• Social Communication Skills for Students with Language Disorders
• Assessing and Addressing Pragmatic Language Skills

Emotional and Behavioral Disorders (EBD) Research Topics For Special Education

• Trauma-Informed Practices in Special Education
• Collaborative Approaches with Mental Health Professionals
• Self-Regulation Strategies for Students with Emotional Disorders
• Building Resilience in Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders
• Bullying Prevention in Special Education Settings
• Social-Emotional Learning Curriculum for Students with EBD
• Restorative Justice Approaches for Students with EBD
• Family Therapy for Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders
• The Role of Positive Peer Relationships in EBD Interventions
• Inclusive Extracurricular Activities for Students with EBD

Physical Disabilities Research Topics For Special Education

• Adaptive Physical Education for Students with Physical Disabilities
• Assistive Technology for Students with Physical Disabilities
• Universal Design for Learning in Physical Education
• Accessibility in School Facilities for Students with Physical Disabilities
• Peer Support Programs for Students with Physical Disabilities
• Transition Planning for Students with Physical Disabilities
• Inclusive Extracurricular Sports for Students with Physical Disabilities
• Collaborative Approaches with Physical Therapists
• Parental Involvement in Physical Disability Education
• Social Inclusion Strategies for Students with Physical Disabilities

Visual Impairments Research Topics For Special Education

• Braille Literacy for Students with Visual Impairments
• Technology-Based Tools for Students with Visual Impairments
• Orientation & Mobility Training for Pupils with Visual Impairments
• Inclusive Art and Music Education for Pupils with Visual Impairments
• Collaboration with Orientation and Mobility Instructors
• Accessible Learning Materials for Pupils with Visual Impairments
• Social Skills Training for Students with Visual Impairments
• Inclusive Science Education for Students with Visual Impairments
• Transition Planning for Students with Visual Impairments
• Building Independence Skills in Students with Visual Impairments

Hearing Impairments Research Topics For Special Education

• Sign Language Instruction for Students with Hearing Impairments
• Assistive Listening Devices in the Classroom
• Inclusive Music Education for Students with Hearing Impairments
• Collaborative Approaches with Deaf Educators
• Communication Strategies for Students with Hearing Impairments
• Inclusive Extracurricular Activities for Students with Hearing Impairments
• Technology-Based Approaches in Hearing Impairment Education
• Parental Involvement in Deaf Education Programs
• Social Skills Development for Students with Hearing Impairments
• Transition Planning for Students with Hearing Impairments

Multiple Disabilities Research Topics For Special Education

• Holistic Approaches to Educating Students with Multiple Disabilities
• Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) for Students with Multiple Disabilities
• Collaborative Teamwork in Addressing Multiple Disabilities
• Assistive Technology Integration for Students with Multiple Disabilities
• Inclusive Extracurricular Activities for Students with Multiple Disabilities
• Parental Support Networks for Families with Multiple Disabilities
• Communication Strategies for Students with Multiple Disabilities
• Social Skills Development for Students with Multiple Disabilities
• Transition Planning for Students with Multiple Disabilities
• Adaptive Physical Education for Students with Multiple Disabilities

Early Childhood Special Education Research Topics

• Inclusive Practices in Early Childhood Special Education
• Early Intervention for Developmental Delays in Young Children
• Parental Involvement in Early Childhood Special Education Programs
• Play-Based Learning for Children with Special Needs
• Transition Planning from Early Childhood to Elementary School
• Speech and Language Development in Early Childhood
• Social-Emotional Learning in Early Childhood Special Education
• Inclusive Outdoor Play for Young Children with Special Needs
• Collaborative Approaches with Early Intervention Specialists
• Assessment Tools for Identifying Special Needs in Early Childhood

Cultural Competence in Special Education Research Topics

• Promoting Cultural Competence in Special Education Curriculum
• Inclusive Practices for English Language Learners with Special Needs
• Addressing Bias and Stereotypes in Special Education
• Culturally Responsive Teaching for Students with Disabilities
• Collaborative Approaches with Multilingual Support Staff
• Parental Involvement in Diverse Special Education Communities
• Celebrating Cultural Diversity in Special Education Programs
• Professional Development on Cultural Competence for Educators
• Inclusive Extracurricular Activities for Diverse Student Populations
• Intersectionality in Special Education: Understanding Unique Challenges

Assistive Technology in Special Education Research Topics

• Innovations in Assistive Technology for Special Education
• Customizing Technology Tools for Individual Student Needs
• Accessible E-books and Digital Resources for Special Education
• Augmented Reality in Special Education Instruction
• Gamification for Skill Development in Special Education
• Virtual Reality Applications for Pupils with Special Needs
• Training Teachers on the Effective Use of Assistive Technology
• Mobile Apps for Social Skills Development in Special Education
• Assistive Technology for Enhancing Communication Skills
• Wearable Devices for Monitoring and Supporting Special Needs

Teacher Collaboration in Special Education Research Topics

• Collaborative Team Approaches for Special Education Success
• Co-Teaching Strategies for Inclusive Classrooms
• Effective Communication among Special Education Professionals
• Collaboration between Special Education and General Education Teachers
• Building Strong Partnerships with Paraprofessionals
• Team-Based Decision-Making in IEP Development
• Professional Learning Communities for Special Education Educators
• Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration in Special Education
• Interprofessional Collaboration with Therapists and Counselors
• Supporting New Teachers in Special Education through Mentoring

Policy and Advocacy in Special Education Research Topics

• Advocacy for Inclusive Education Policies
• Legislative Initiatives Impacting Special Education
• Parental Advocacy for Children with Special Needs
• Addressing Disparities in Special Education Funding
• The Role of Special Education in Education Reform
• Ensuring Equity in Special Education Access
• Policy Implications of Remote Learning for Students with Disabilities
• Advocacy for Transition Services and Post-School Outcomes
• Legal Rights & Protections for Pupils with Disabilities
• The Impact of Federal and State Policies on Special Education

Transition Services and Post-School Outcomes Research Topics

• Transition Planning for High School Students with Disabilities
• Vocational Training and Employment Opportunities for Graduates
• Independent Living Skills for Young Adults with Disabilities
• Post-Secondary Education Options for Students with Special Needs
• Inclusive Community Participation for Young Adults with Disabilities
• Mentoring Programs for Transitioning Students with Disabilities
• Collaborative Approaches with Vocational Rehabilitation Services
• Self-Advocacy and Self-Determination in Transition Planning
• Parental Involvement in Transition Services
• Assessing the Effectiveness of Transition Programs

Mental Health and Well-being in Special Education Research Topics

• Addressing Mental Health Challenges in Special Education
• Social-Emotional Learning for Students with Mental Health Needs
• Collaborative Approaches with School Counselors and Psychologists
• Preventing Burnout among Special Education Professionals
• Building Resilience in Students with Mental Health Challenges
• Parental Involvement in Mental Health Support Programs
• Integrating Mindfulness Practices in Special Education
• Peer Support Programs for Students with Mental Health Needs
• Recognizing and Responding to Trauma in Special Education
• Community Resources for Mental Health Support in Special Education

Assessment and Evaluation in Special Education Research Topics

• Alternative Assessment Methods for Students with Disabilities
• Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) and Goal Setting
• Progress Monitoring Strategies for Special Education Students
• Assessing Social-Emotional Development in Special Education
• Standardized Testing Adaptations for Students with Disabilities
• Teacher Training on Fair and Inclusive Assessment Practices
• Collaborative Approaches in Multidisciplinary Assessments
• Parental Involvement in the Assessment Process
• Addressing Bias in Special Education Assessment Tools
• Utilizing Technology for Dynamic Assessments in Special Education

Social Inclusion in Special Education Research Topics

• Promoting Social Inclusion through School-wide Initiatives
• Peer Support Programs for Social Inclusion
• Celebrating Neurodiversity in School Communities
• Building Positive Peer Relationships in Inclusive Classrooms
• Inclusive Extracurricular Activities for Social Integration
• Anti-Bullying Programs and Inclusive Education
• Parental Involvement in Promoting Social Inclusion
• Student-led Initiatives for Inclusive School Culture
• Cultural Competence in Fostering Social Inclusion
• Assessing and Improving Social Inclusion Practices in Special Education

So, these are the research topics for special education that cover a wide range of areas within special education, providing research opportunities that can contribute to improving educational practices and outcomes for students with special needs.

Current Challenges in Special Education

Here are some current challenges in special education:

Identification and Assessment 

Accurately identifying students with disabilities and conducting appropriate assessments can be complex and controversial. There are concerns about over-identification or under-identification of certain groups.

Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) 

Developing, implementing, and updating effective IEPs for each student can be time-consuming and complex. Disagreements between parents and schools about IEP goals and services are expected.

Least Restrictive Environment 

Determining the right balance between inclusive general education settings and separate unique education settings is ongoing. There are debates around mainstreaming and inclusion approaches.

Discipline and Behavioral Issues

Students with disabilities tend to have higher rates of disciplinary actions. Appropriate behavioral interventions and maintaining a positive school climate are challenges.

Transition to Adulthood 

Helping students transition from high school to higher education, employment, and independent living requires extensive planning and support. Outcomes for students with disabilities after high school need improvement.

Parental Involvement 

Getting parents actively engaged in their child’s special education program and setting appropriate expectations can be difficult for schools. Cultural and language barriers may exist.

Teacher Shortages 

There is a shortage of completely certified special education teachers. Providing adequate training and support for general education teachers with special needs students is also a concern.

Funding and Resources 

Special education requires substantial financial resources, trained staff, assistive technology, and other supports. Inequities often exist between wealthy and poorer districts.

How To Choose the Good Special Education Research Topic

Here are some tips for choosing a good special education research topic:

• Pick a specific learning disability or developmental disorder to focus on. Researching one condition like dyslexia, ADHD, or autism will allow you to study it more deeply.
• Look at topics related to current laws and policies that impact special education. Researching how these laws affect students and teachers could provide helpful information.
• Study inclusion practices and their effects. How integrating special needs students through buddy programs and inclusive classrooms works.
• Explore assistive technologies. Investigate how technology tools like learning apps, reading software, and accessible devices improve outcomes.
• Evaluate how schools prepare special needs students for life after graduation. This includes independent living and finding careers.
• Research how to improve teacher training to meet diverse learning needs. This could have high practical value.
• Consider solutions that make learning accessible for all students. This aligns with special education values.
• Carefully select research methods that fit your topic and population. This could include case studies, surveys, or data analysis.

The key is picking a specific, well-defined topic that tackles real issues and solutions. Consulting advisors can help narrow your focus. Using plain language will make your research clear and understandable.

Final Remarks

In conclusion, researching and addressing the diverse challenges in special education is crucial for creating inclusive, effective learning environments for students with disabilities. The extensive research topics presented here cover critical areas, from inclusive education practices to mental health support and transition services. 

Ongoing research is pivotal in improving teaching methods, identifying disabilities early, and enhancing the educational experience. Despite progress, challenges such as accurate identification, IEP development, and resource disparities persist. 

By fostering collaboration, advocating for policy changes, and investing in teacher training, we can work towards a more equitable and supportive particular education system, ensuring every pupil has the opportunity to succeed.

Similar Articles

How To Do Homework Fast – 11 Tips To Do Homework Fast

Homework is one of the most important parts that have to be done by students. It has been around for…

How to Write an Assignment Introduction – 6 Best Tips

In essence, the writing tasks in academic tenure students are an integral part of any curriculum. Whether in high school,…

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 17 April 2024

Students with special educational needs in regular classrooms and their peer effects on learning achievement

• V. B. Salas García   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7568-3879 1 &
• José María Rentería   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6486-0032 2  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  521 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

792 Accesses

9 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Development studies

This study explores the impact of inclusive education on the educational outcomes of students without Special Educational Needs (non-SEN) in Peru, utilizing official Ministry of Education data and implementing cross-sectional regression analyses. Inclusive education is a complex issue that, without appropriate adaptations and comprehensive understanding, can present substantial challenges to the educational community. While prior research from developed nations offers diverse perspectives on the effects of inclusive education on non-SEN students, limited evidence exists regarding its impact in developing countries. Our study addresses this gap by examining inclusive education in Peru and its influence on non-SEN students, thereby contributing to the existing literature. Our findings reveal that, on average, the presence of SEN students in regular classrooms does not significantly affect their non-SEN counterparts. However, we uncover heterogeneous results contingent on the specific type of SEN and students’ academic placement. These results emphasize the importance of targeted resources and parental involvement in facilitating successful inclusive education, particularly for specific SEN types. In summary, this study underscores the need for tailored strategies and additional resources to foster the success of inclusive education and calls for further research in this field to expand our understanding and enhance educational policy.

Similar content being viewed by others

The concept of inclusive education from the point of view of academics specialising in special education at Saudi universities

Dreams and realities of school tracking and vocational education

Persistent association between family socioeconomic status and primary school performance in Britain over 95 years

Introduction.

Inclusive education has become a significant policy for improving access to and the quality of education for children with special educational needs (SEN), who often encounter physical and social barriers hindering their access to education and entry into the labor market, which in turn is detrimental to the economic and social progress of a country (Filmer, 2008 ; Mitra and Sambamoorthi, 2008 ). Thus, the United Nations has declared “inclusive and equitable quality education” as the fourth 2030 Sustainable Development Goal, which aims to reduce the disability gap in education. Likewise, there exist international declarations like the Salamanca Statement in 1994 (UNESCO, 1994 ) or the Declaration of the Decade of the Americas for the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities 2016–2026 (OAS, 2018 ) that incorporate the principle of inclusive education to guarantee education for all.

There are different education approaches Footnote 1 to ensure education for children with SEN, but the inclusive approach, unlike others, promotes equal participation of SEN students in regular schools by attending classes alongside same-aged non-SEN students (Dixon, 2005 ). Inclusive education goes beyond the placement of pupils; it refers to a unified system that receives all students regardless of their abilities or disabilities (Dixon, 2005 ). Under the inclusive approach, governments and schools should provide the means (i.e., physical and human resources) to reduce or eliminate physical, academic, and social hurdles faced by SEN students within regular schools (Dixon, 2005 ). Thus, inclusive education aims for social cohesion and a less discriminatory education approach that helps enhance the human capital acquisition of children with SEN (Kiuppis, 2014 ).

Despite the efforts for an inclusive education agenda worldwide, children with SEN remain behind in education indicators such as years of education, school attendance, or academic achievement (Filmer, 2008 ; Rangvid, 2022 ). This raises concerns about the impact that placement of children with SEN in regular schools may have on the educational achievement of children without SEN since these children are also involved in the inclusive education system (Rangvid, 2019 ; Ruijs and Peetsma, 2009 ). In Peru, for instance, some teachers in regular schools as well as some leaders of deaf organizations, do not support inclusive education as they think it is detrimental for both SEN and non-SEN students (Goico, 2019 ; Peruvian Ombudsman, 2019 ). Nevertheless, there is little empirical literature focused on the effects of inclusive education not only on SEN students but also on non-SEN students, especially in developing countries that shelter a high percentage of people with disabilities (Olusanya et al., 2022 ). This paper, therefore, aims to fill that gap by using information from a developing country, namely Peru. It investigates the impact of inclusive education, quantified through the presence of students with SEN in regular classrooms, on the academic performance of their non-SEN counterparts. Analyzing the peer effects of inclusive education is of utmost interest for policymakers aiming to increase the presence of SEN students in regular schools, as policy implications should consider the effects on all children.

The present work provides three main contributions to the existing literature regarding peer effects in the context of inclusive education. First, we provide new evidence using unusual and rich data from a middle-income country. To our knowledge, there is only one study focusing on a developing country. Indeed, Contreras et al. ( 2020 ) analyze the Chilean case and find that placement of children with SEN in regular classrooms negatively affects the standardized test scores in mathematics and reading of their non-SEN peers, but it is neutralized when schools receive additional resources and specialized professionals. Nevertheless, Contreras et al. ( 2020 ) use panel data for students attending primary schools in two periods, 2007 and 2011, without including types of SEN. In contrast, we study children attending primary and secondary schools using cross-section data between 2011 and 2019 and disaggregate our analysis by types of SEN Footnote 2 .

Our second contribution is to disaggregate our analysis by type of SEN. We are aware of two studies that use an overall indicator to reflect the presence of SEN students and disaggregate it by type of SEN. On one hand, Hanushek et al. ( 2002 ) examine two types of special educational needs: learning or emotional and speech; while, Ruijs ( 2017 ) examines four types: visual, hearing, physical or intellectual, and behavioral. In our case, besides evaluating the consequences of placing children with mobility, vision, hearing, and intellectual or learning disabilities in a regular classroom, we also evaluate the repercussions of placing children with autistic spectrum disorder in a regular classroom, which is a much less studied topic.

Finally, our third contribution is to explore the heterogeneous results of inclusive education on the non-SEN student population. Unlike previous studies, we explore the potential different impact of inclusive education between male and female non-SEN students. As most reproductive work has traditionally been done by women (cf. Razavi, 2012 ), it could be argued that female non-SEN students are more likely to take care of or help SEN students, which in turn may influence their educational achievement. Our heterogeneity analysis also takes into account school characteristics like classroom size as well as mother’s characteristics.

In our analysis, we take significant steps to mitigate potential biases stemming from endogenous classroom selection and the sorting of SEN students. We achieve this by focusing on schools with one class per grade level, which provides a more controlled setting for our study. Moreover, our dataset allows us to identify the class composition, which is vital for investigating educational peer effects. The classroom environment is particularly relevant, as classmates have a substantial impact on each other’s educational outcomes, given their shared classroom experience throughout the school day (Balestra et al., 2022 ; Burke and Sass, 2013 ; Lazear, 2001 ).

Our findings suggest that the inclusion of students with SEN in regular classrooms, on average, exerts a neutral influence on their non-SEN peers. A nuanced examination reveals varied results contingent upon the specific categories of SEN. This variability is consistent with the fact that SEN encompasses a broad spectrum of support requirements arising from diverse degrees and types of individual abilities, spanning physical, psychological, cognitive, and sensory domains. Hence, the influence of inclusive education would vary according to the distinct profile of the SEN student integrated into a conventional classroom setting. Furthermore, our results underscore the importance of accounting for temporal dynamics and the particular educational phase in gauging the impact of SEN students on their non-SEN counterparts. This observation aligns with the differential results discerned across academic grades.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The literature review and institutional setting are presented in the next section, followed by a description of the data and empirical strategy. After that, we discuss our results, and finally, we conclude.

This section starts with a brief literature review and then describes the main features of the Peruvian educational system as well as its public policy approach to inclusive education.

Literature review

The inclusion of students with SEN in regular schools remains a subject of debate due to the mixed findings within the empirical literature. Proponents of inclusive education argue that attending regular schools is not only a fundamental human right for children with SEN (Ainscow and César, 2006 ; Rangvid, 2022 ; Ruijs and Peetsma, 2009 ) but can also yield benefits for non-SEN students, particularly in terms of their learning development. This is attributed to the additional resources allocated to inclusive education (Keslair et al., 2012 ; Ruijs, 2017 ). Besides, inclusive education may help children without SEN to develop soft skills like kindness, tolerance, and patience, which are important to living in a diverse society (Contreras et al., 2020 ; Dixon, 2005 ). On the other hand, the main concerns regarding inclusive education are related to negative peer effects. The literature on class composition states that students’ performance is influenced by their peers’ characteristics (Ammermueller and Pischke, 2009 ; Burke and Sass, 2013 ; Lavy et al., 2012 ). Since children with SEN may require more teaching attention and show disruptive behaviors (Ahmed et al., 2021 ; Contreras et al., 2020 ; Rangvid, 2019 ; Ruijs, 2017 ), they could be considered “bad” students who could interfere with the educational development of their classmates without SEN (Lavy et al., 2012 ; Lazear, 2001 ), especially for those who are at the bottom of the ability distribution (Balestra et al., 2022 ; Lavy et al., 2012 ).

The quantitative studies that examine the peer effects of inclusive education mainly use data from developed countries. Most of them have found that inclusive education has a negative or null effect on non-SEN students’ outcomes. For instance, using data from Switzerland, Balestra et al. ( 2022 ) find that placing SEN students in regular classrooms harms not only educational outcomes but also labor market outcomes for non-SEN students. Similarly, studies from the United States (Fletcher, 2010 ) and Denmark (Kristoffersen et al., 2015 ; Rangvid, 2019 ) show that exposure to SEN students decreases reading test scores of non-SEN students. Also, for the United States, Gottfried ( 2014 ) and Gottfried et al. ( 2016 ) present evidence that inclusive education worsens the non-cognitive skills of non-SEN students. Fletcher ( 2010 ), however, points out that the negative effect of inclusive education in the United States disappears for reading when their lagged scores are considered in the analysis. Likewise, studies for Canada (Friesen et al., 2010 ), England (Keslair et al., 2012 ), and the Netherlands (Ruijs, 2017 ) also find that the presence of SEN students does not affect the academic performance of their non-SEN peers; but they point out that this result may be due to additional resources received by regular schools with SEN students. Conversely, other studies have found positive externalities of SEN students on the educational achievement of their non-SEN peers. For instance, Cole et al. ( 2004 ) point out that non-SEN students in the United States perform better at reading and mathematics tests since they may benefit from the additional resources allocated to inclusive education. Likewise, Hanushek et al. ( 2002 ) find that non-SEN students attending inclusive classrooms in the United States improve their mathematics test scores. Using data from the same country, Gottfried and McGene ( 2013 ) go beyond by showing that having a sibling with SEN helps to improve the schooling achievement of those siblings without SEN.

Several meta-analyses and systematic reviews have examined the effects of inclusive education on students with and without SEN. The coincidences lie in the varied impacts of inclusive education on non-SEN students, demonstrating a nuanced and context-dependent picture. While Dell’Anna et al. ( 2021 ) hint at positive peer attitudes in inclusive settings, the academic outcomes and the experience of non-SEN students diverge, with high achievers potentially benefiting more than low achievers (Ruijs and Peetsma, 2009 ). Kart and Kart ( 2021 ) and Szumski et al. ( 2017 ) contribute to the discussion, highlighting mixed academic effects across different grade levels. The meta-analyses by Oh-Young and Filler ( 2015 ) and Krämer et al. ( 2021 ) emphasize the overall positive impact of inclusive settings for students with SEN while still acknowledging variations in outcomes. Finally, Van Mieghem et al. ( 2020 ) emphasize the pivotal role of teacher professional development in the successful implementation of inclusive education.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that the conflicting results found in the literature may be explained by the differences in the criteria used to identify a SEN student. Most of the previous studies have used an aggregated measure to encompass all SEN students without considering the types of SEN (e.g., Contreras et al., 2020 ; Rangvid, 2019 ). On the other hand, some studies have focused on one or two types of special needs; such as emotional disturbances and mental disabilities (e.g., Cole et al., 2004 ; Fletcher, 2010 ; Hanushek et al., 2002 ; Kristoffersen et al., 2015 ), or learning and behavioral disabilities (e.g., Cole et al., 2004 ; Friesen et al., 2010 ; Hanushek et al., 2002 ). The present paper addresses these limitations found in the literature by taking into account different types of SEN and also by exploring the potential heterogeneous results of inclusive education for non-SEN students.

Institutional setting: The educational system in Peru

Primary and secondary education in Peru is compulsory and provided by the government at no cost and by the private sector with a wide tuition range. Peruvian children between 6- and 11- years old attend primary school and start secondary school by the age of 12 for a period of 5 years. The last National Population Census in 2017 reports that roughly 5.4% and 7.0% of Peruvians who are primary-school and secondary-school-aged, respectively, have at least one disability. However, according to the School Census of the same year, <1% of children attending regular schools are categorized as SEN students, which suggests that inclusive education in Peru is not well developed. Despite this low enrollment rate, the percentage of SEN students grew from 0.26% in 2007 to 0.96% in 2019.

Since primary and secondary schools in Peru must comply with a mandatory national curriculum, the same courses are taken by children who attend the same grade level across different schools. Schools may have more than one class per grade level, which are called sections , which students are assigned when they start primary school, which makes it less likely that students are sorted in a non-random fashion. Besides, every section has a specific classroom where students are instructed in most of their courses; thus, students do not need to move among different classrooms throughout the school day. At the primary school, the teacher assigned to a section is usually responsible for the majority of the courses; whereas, at the secondary school, it is often the case that there is a different teacher for each course. Another characteristic of the Peruvian education system is that it allows parents to send their children to any school, public or private, even if that school is outside their district of residence.

According to the last National Population Census in 2017, Peru has achieved almost universal coverage of education, 94.9% of the population aged 12 or over have primary education, and 74.5% aged 17 or over have secondary education. These numbers, however, mask a disability gap. Among adults aged 17 or over, 14.1% of people with at least one disability report having no education, whereas only 3.9% of people with no disabilities report the same. There is also an educational disability gap of 11.9 percentage points (p.p.) among the female population, but it decreases to 7.1 p.p. among the male population. These figures suggest that having a disability poses a larger burden for females than for males.

In this context, the Peruvian National Education Law recognized in 2003 inclusive education as the main approach to providing education to students with SEN, which should be accompanied by supplementary one-to-one attention by specialists (Congreso de la República, 2003 ). Thus, the Peruvian legal framework advocates an inclusive approach to integrating children and youth with disabilities into society. Aligned with the national inclusive policy, the state, as per the 2012 General Law of Persons with Disabilities (Law 29973), ensures access to quality inclusive education that accommodates individual needs. This entails adjustments in infrastructure, furniture, materials, curriculum, and teaching processes, all aimed at facilitating quality learning and fostering the comprehensive development of each student. It is worth noting, however, that empirical evidence indicates that many regular schools lack the necessary infrastructure, materials, and human resources to accommodate students with disabilities (Cueto et al., 2018 ; Peruvian Ombudsman, 2011 ).

The basic education system comprises three modalities: regular basic education (EBR), alternative basic education (EBA), and special basic education (EBE). EBR represents conventional formal education. EBA caters to students who lack access to EBR, emphasizing vocational and entrepreneurial skills. EBE is designated for students with SEN related to disability, talent, or giftedness. EBA and EBR schools, when admitting students with SEN, are termed inclusive schools . EBE operates in both inclusive schools and standalone EBE schools. In inclusive schools that accept students with mild disabilities and giftedness, EBE provides support and guidance through programs like Support and Advisory Services for Special Educational Needs (SAANEE). This includes personalized services and support to students, parents, teachers, and school principals through weekly visits of specialized professionals (Congreso de la República, 2006 ). Nevertheless, the evidence shows that inclusive education in Peru is far from successfully being implemented, and it is combined with an “integration approach” (Peruvian Ombudsman, 2011 ). On the other hand, dedicated EBE schools directly serve severe and multi-disabled students with needs beyond the scope of EBR or EBA schools. EBR and EBA schools are mandated to reserve at least two slots per classroom during the enrollment period for the inclusion of students with mild or moderate disabilities. However, in practice, this requirement is not systematically fulfilled (Cueto et al., 2018 ).

Data and methodology

In this study, we use three datasets that are collected by the Peruvian Ministry of Education (MINEDU). First, we utilized the Student Census Evaluation (ECE) as our primary data source, which encompasses the scores achieved by students in the national standardized tests of reading and mathematics Footnote 3 . To create our dependent variable, “learning achievement”, we transformed these scores into z -scores, standardizing them by grade level and by subject to have a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one for use in our econometric analysis. Furthermore, the ECE dataset includes additional demographic information such as gender and the primary language spoken by the students. The ECE started in 2007, with annual assessments of students in the 2nd grade of primary (2P). Subsequently, it was expanded in 2015 to encompass students in the 2nd grade of secondary (2S). In 2017, however, the ECE was not conducted. Our second dataset is the National School Census (CE) which contains information regarding school characteristics and grade composition. The CE has been yearly collected since 2004, and it covers public and private schools. We use it to measure inclusive education by identifying the presence of SEN students at the section level. These two datasets are merged at the school level through a school identifier; thus, each student is linked to section characteristics in the school he or she is attending. The last dataset is the Information System to Support the Management of the Education Institution (SG), which was implemented in 2003 but has been mandatory only since 2011. The SG contains information that is uploaded every year by teachers or school principals. This includes students’ age, mothers’ age and education, and number of siblings. The SG is merged with the other datasets by using a student identifier.

For our analysis, we focus on students attending 2P in the period dating from 2011 to 2016 (excluding 2014) Footnote 4 and students attending 2S from 2015 to 2019 (excluding 2017). Footnote 5 For both grades, 2P and 2S, we account for potential grade advancement and delay. Footnote 6 Therefore, in the case of 2P where students are usually 7 years old, we include children aged between 6 and 8 years, and for 2S where students are usually 13 years old, we include children aged between 12 and 14 years. The final number of observations for 2P comprises 55,637 students who took the reading test and 55,614 students who took the mathematics test. And, for 2S, we have 47,491 students who took the reading test and 47,484 students who took the mathematics test.

To evaluate the influence of inclusive education on non-SEN students’ learning achievement, we use the CE where the school principal reports the number of SEN students placed in each grade level every year and per type of SEN. Footnote 7 This report is based on medical certificates, psycho-pedagogical certificates, and parents’ affidavits. Thus, we can identify the presence of SEN students per section to measure inclusive education. Footnote 8 Besides, we disaggregate the presence of SEN students per type. Specifically, we distinguish, for each section, the presence of students with mobility, vision, hearing, and intellectual or learning disabilities, as well as those with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). In the case of intellectual or learning disabilities, the CE includes those students with Down syndrome, brain injury, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. The other SEN types considered in the CE include students with speech impairment, deaf-blindness, and hospitalized. Although gifted students are identified as SEN students in the CE, we exclude them in our measure of SEN.

There are three main challenges to estimating peer effects, as stated by Manski ( 1993 ), that could hinder proper identification of the influence of SEN students on the learning achievement of their non-SEN peers. First, students in the same cohort could face similar environmental factors or have similar unobserved characteristics that may influence their academic outcomes rather than having classmates with SEN. To disentangle the environment from peer effects, we follow the literature by using a large number of observations and fixed effects (Balestra et al., 2022 ; Burke and Sass, 2013 ).

Second, there is a potential reflection problem as classmates may influence each other and determine their outcomes simultaneously. Since we focus on SEN characteristics related to physical disabilities, health issues, and injuries determined by specialists, it is less likely that the SEN status of students was determined by the learning achievement of their non-SEN peers.

The third problem is related to self-selection. In the Peruvian school system, parents may choose to send their children to any school regardless of their district of residence; thus, specific school characteristics may attract certain types of students. To address this problem, we restrict the analysis to schools with similar characteristics. We select schools located in urban areas providing mixed-sex education that operate on the main school campus only during the morning shift and with 10–30 students per section. In the case of primary education, we select full-grade schools. Footnote 9 Besides, to address a potential sorting problem that could make it difficult to identify whether the learning outcome is due to the presence of SEN students or one’s ability, we select schools with one section per grade level. In this way, we avoid the possibility for school administrators to group students into sections based on their characteristics or for parents to choose a section without SEN students. Finally, more than 90% of non-SEN students take the standardized national tests, which suggests that school principals do not select high-performance students to take these tests.

To test the validity of our identification strategy, we perform two balancing checks for 2P and 2S, presented in Tables 1 and 2 , respectively. To perform these balancing checks, we use only students who took both reading and mathematics standardized tests, rather than separating them by subject as we do for the econometric analyses. Panels A, B, and C show that the presence of at least one SEN student does not determine the gender, language, or age of non-SEN students, respectively. We observe that coefficients are statistically not significant, and their size is smaller in comparison to those from the main analysis, except for reading test scores in 2S. In addition, panel D shows that individual characteristics do not determine the presence of at least one SEN student in the classroom. These results provide evidence against the likelihood of selection into classrooms.

To examine the impact of inclusive education on standardized test performance of non-SEN students, we estimate the following linear model:

Equation ( 1 ) is estimated separately for each grade level (2P or 2S) and subject (reading or mathematics) using a linear regression. \({{{\rm {EDC}}}}_{{i{\rm {s}}t}}\) is the learning achievement of student \(i\) in section \({s}\) at year \(t\) , measured by the z -score of the standardized test. \({{{\rm {SEN}}}}_{{{\rm {s}}}t}\) is a dichotomous variable capturing the presence of at least one SEN student in section \({s}\) at year \(t\) ; thus, \({\alpha }_{1}\) is our parameter of interest. In other specifications below, \({{{\rm {SEN}}}}_{{{s}t}}\) will be differentiated by type of SEN. \({{{\rm {STD}}}}_{{i{s}t}}\) is a vector of student-level control variables that include age in years and indicators for gender (1 = women) and spoken language (1 = indigenous). The vector \({{{\rm {SEC}}}}_{{st}}\) controls for section-level variables without student \(i\) . It includes mean age, proportion of male students, proportion of indigenous speakers, and number of students. The vector \({{{\rm {SCH}}}}_{t}\) includes number of students at the school level. \({{{\rm {HH}}}}_{{it}}\) includes the following household characteristics: mother’s age, mother’s education, and the number of siblings. We also include school-fixed effects \(\left({\gamma }_{{s}}\right)\) Footnote 10 and year-fixed effects \(\left({\gamma }_{t}\right)\) . Finally, \({\varepsilon }_{{i{s}t}}\) is an unobserved error term, and we cluster standard errors at the section level as this is the common environment shared by students (Balestra et al., 2022 ).

To assess potential heterogeneous influences, we follow recent literature Footnote 11 and estimate Eq. ( 1 ) using split samples by the characteristic of interest (Feigenberg et al., 2023 ). In particular, we evaluate the gender of the student \(i\) . For section characteristics, we evaluate the number of students. Finally, we assess the varying estimates based on the mother’s age and the mother’s education. In the case of characteristics that are represented by continuous or categorical variables, we convert them into dichotomous variables. For the number of students, we split the sample between sections that have 20 or fewer students and sections with 21 or more students. In the case of the mother’s age, we use the mean age to split the sample above and below the mean. The mean age is 41.5 for those mothers with children who attend 2P and 44.8 for those with children who attend 2S. Finally, for mothers’ education, we split the sample between those with and without tertiary education.

The descriptive statistics for our final cross-section subpopulations are presented in Table 3 . All descriptive and econometric analyses were conducted using Stata 18. In this case, we combine observations that include students who took both reading and mathematics standardized tests, as the characteristics of the separated subpopulations are similar to each other. According to Table 3 , students with SEN generally have lower reading and mathematics scores compared to their peers without SEN across both primary and secondary grades. This trend is more pronounced in 2S compared to 2P. We also observe in Table 3 that the proportions of women and indigenous language speakers are relatively consistent across SEN and non-SEN cohorts. Approximately 48% of the students are female, and the average age is 6.9 in 2P and 12.9 in 2S. However, it is interesting to note that the mean proportion of indigenous language speakers is higher in 2S (~22%) compared to 2P (~12%), indicating a potential demographic shift as students progress through the education system. A similar trend for indigenous language speakers is observed at the section level. Moreover, figures in Table 3 show that the mean age in a section is ~7.2 in 2P and 13.3 in 2S, the sample is balanced between male and female students at the section level, and there are around 20 students per section. Regarding household characteristics, the average age of mothers is 41.5 for those with children in 2P and 44.8 for those with children in 2S, around 6 out of 10 students have mothers with primary or secondary education, and the majority of students have more than two siblings. Finally, students enrolled in primary education typically attend larger schools, characterized by a pupil population exceeding 120, in contrast to those in secondary education, where schools typically accommodate fewer than 100 students.

Empirical results

Regression results from Eq. ( 1 ) are shown in Table 4 . Footnote 12 For column (1), we use ECE and CE datasets, which do not include students’ age or household characteristics. For columns (2) through (6), we add the SG dataset to incorporate students’ age and household characteristics. Columns (1) through (4) include the proportion of repeaters and the presence of at least one specialized teacher when students were 3 years old, and they were not attending school; thus, the presence of an SEN student should not influence the proportion of repeaters or presence of a specialized teacher. Columns (5) and (6) do not include those variables, and the results remain similar to those obtained in the previous columns. In addition, as a robustness check, we try different subpopulations based on students’ age (columns (2) through (4)) and schools with variation in SEN students (column (6)). For all the specifications, our results consistently show that the presence of at least one SEN student as a measure of inclusive education does not have a significant influence on the learning achievement of students who attend 2P or 2S. Our findings align with similar results from other countries such as Canada (Friesen et al., 2010 ), England (Keslair et al., 2012 ), and the Netherlands (Ruijs, 2017 ), indicating that inclusive education does not have a significant impact on the academic achievement of non-SEN students.

Nevertheless, we notice in Table 4 that, after including students’ age and household characteristics, the negative relationship between inclusive education and learning achievement (column 1) turned into a positive relationship (columns 2 through 6). Even in the case of students who attend 2S, the magnitude of the positive relationship between inclusive education and mathematics scores increased when student’s age and household characteristics were included in the regression. This suggests that the attributes of a student’s household, along with individual traits correlated with them, such as motivation, self-discipline, and parental support, may exert a positive influence on their learning environment. This influence could potentially counterbalance any adverse effects of inclusive education. An alternative explanation lies in the interaction effects between inclusive education and these supplementary factors. For instance, older students or those from more privileged households could potentially derive greater benefits from inclusive education due to their increased adaptability to the classroom environment. We further explore these issues in the Heterogeneity analysis section.

The main results, however, may mask different outcomes by type of SEN. Table 5 shows the results from Eq. ( 1 ) using the presence of at least one student with a certain type of SEN as a measure of inclusive education. Results Footnote 13 in Table 5 are estimated by gradually adding control variables in each column. Columns (1) and (6) do not include any control variable. Columns (2) and (7) add student controls. Cohort controls are added in columns (3) and (8), and school controls are added in columns (5) and (9). Finally, family controls are added in columns (5) and (10). As we can see in Table 5 , adding variables does not substantially change the estimates. We also notice that the sign of the relationship between inclusive education and learning achievement varies by type of SEN, and only vision disability (panel A) and mobility disability (panel B) have a significant positive relationship with the standardized test scores of students who attend 2P and 2S, respectively. As we can observe in Table 5 , even when we use the Romano-Wolf multiple hypothesis correction, the significance of our findings remains similar across different specifications (cf. Clarke, 2021 , Clarke et al., 2020 ). These findings confirm our main results that inclusive education would not harm the learning performance of non-SEN students, regardless of the type of SEN presented by their peers.

Results in Table 5 show that the impact of attending an inclusive classroom with at least one SEN student with a vision disability increases the reading and mathematics scores of students who attend 2P by 0.135 (adjusted p -value < 0.05) (column 5) and by 0.154 (adjusted p -value < 0.05) (column 10) of a standard deviation, respectively. In the case of students who attend 2S, the impact of the presence of at least one student with mobility disability increases the performance on reading and mathematics tests by 0.099 (adjusted p -value < 0.01) (column 5) and by 0.100 (adjusted p -value < 0.05) (column 10) of a standard deviation, respectively. Similar to our results, Ruijs ( 2017 ) found that the presence of students with vision disabilities as well as physical and intellectual disabilities in the third level of pre-vocational secondary education in the Netherlands increases standardized test scores of non-SEN students. Moreover, previous studies pointed out that non-SEN students show more positive attitudes toward their peers with physical disabilities (de Boer et al., 2012 ), which may explain the positive influence of SEN students with vision and mobility disabilities that we have found on the learning achievement on non-SEN students.

Heterogeneity analysis

We further undertake several analyses to understand the differences in the impact of inclusive education. Footnote 14 Clogg’s z -test is implemented for testing the statistical significance of the difference between the coefficients estimated separately by splitting Eq. ( 1 ) (Clogg et al., 1995 ).

Estimates of inclusive education by gender of non-SEN students are presented in Table 6 . The results show that the influence of inclusive education on learning achievement is not statistically significant for men or women, and there is no statistical difference between them.

To explore the influence of inclusive education by usage of adequate resources, we analyze the influence of the total number of students at the section level. We find that inclusive education is associated with higher scores in reading and mathematics for non-SEN students who attend classrooms with 10–20 students and with lower scores for those who attend classrooms with 21–30 students, regardless the student attends 2P or 2S. This result may reflect that small groups foster a closer interaction between students and teacher which in turn may allow the teacher to develop better teaching strategies since they know each student better. The result of inclusive education by section size, however, is statistically different only for the reading score obtained by non-SEN students who attend 2S. This result underscores the complexity of inclusive education’s effects and the importance of context-specific considerations. Authorities should pay special attention to the number of students assigned to an inclusive classroom.

To analyze the household’s characteristics, we use the mother’s age and education. In the case of reading and mathematics in 2P, it seems that older mothers help to improve the scores of non-SEN students who attend an inclusive classroom; but there is not a clear pattern in the case of 2S. The differences in the test scores by mother’s age, however, are not statistically significant in any case, 2P or 2S. We have to take this result with caution as it is possible that other family characteristics rather than the mother’s age act as a moderator that could influence the effect of inclusive education on children’s outcomes in school (Leigh and Gong, 2010 ; López Turley, 2003 ).

We also present in Table 6 the estimates of inclusive education on test scores of non-SEN students by mother’s education. We observe that the difference in inclusive education’s influence on test scores in reading and mathematics is not statistically different regardless mother’s education. Although the difference is small and not significant, we observe that among non-SEN students in 2P and 2S with well-educated mothers (i.e., tertiary education), inclusive education is associated with lower scores in reading and mathematics. This finding may suggest that well-educated mothers may dedicate fewer hours to helping their children as they are more likely to work outside the home in comparison to less-educated mothers.

The current study focused on the learning achievement of non-SEN students in Peru who attend an inclusive classroom. We use three rich administrative datasets that allow us to measure inclusive education by the presence of at least one SEN student in the classroom, which is the appropriate setting as students spend their school day mostly within the classroom. Thus, we are able to capture the influence of inclusive education on the test scores of non-SEN students on national standardized tests in reading and mathematics.

Inclusive strategies in regular classrooms are undeniably crucial, but without appropriate adaptations and a comprehensive understanding by all involved, inclusive education can pose considerable challenges for the entire educational community, including non-SEN students (Edwards et al., 2019 ; Nilsen, 2020 ). While some studies for developed countries show that the learning achievement of non-SEN students is improved by attending inclusive classrooms and others point to negative effects, there is limited evidence regarding the impact of inclusive education for developing countries. From this perspective, our study contributes to the literature by examining the case of inclusive education in Peru and its consequences on non-SEN students. To the best of our knowledge, this topic has not been previously analyzed in the Peruvian context. Further, we explore the influence of inclusive education by type of SEN and undertake a heterogeneity analysis.

Overall, this study has found that the inclusion of SEN students in regular classrooms, on average, yields no substantial implications for their non-SEN counterparts. Our results have shown consistency among the different model specifications estimated using several subpopulations with different age ranges as well as an additional sub-population restricted to schools with variation in the presence of SEN students. Nevertheless, it is worth noticing that there is a negative relationship between inclusive education and learning achievement of non-SEN students that turns into a positive relationship when the mother’s characteristics are included in the analysis. This may present an opportunity for school authorities to involve parents in the learning process of their kids to enhance inclusive education programs, as the literature suggests that the way inclusive education is implemented may lead to positive results on the academic performance of non-SEN students (Szumski et al., 2017 ).

We also found that the implications of inclusive education are contingent upon the specific type of SEN. In particular, non-SEN students benefit from attending classrooms with at least one student with a vision disability in 2P and a mobility disability in 2S. This finding underscores differential effects between lower and later grades, a phenomenon previously noted in the literature (Kart and Kart, 2021 ). Also, this result should draw attention from policymakers interested in inclusive education as schools may be more suitable to assist this type of SEN students, whereas the potential lack of resources to support other types of SEN might detrimentally affect SEN and non-SEN students (Edwards et al., 2019 ). In addition, we find that the influence of inclusive education is heterogeneous. We find that the small size of the classroom (20 or fewer students) helps to improve learning achievement in reading for non-SEN students who attend an inclusive classroom in 2S. Similar to previous literature (e.g., Szumski et al., 2017 ), this finding points to the need for educational policymakers to increase the budget for inclusive education, targeting to hire more and adequate resources. Finally, the mother’s characteristics are not relevant to explain differences in the estimates of inclusive education on academic achievement of non-SEN students.

Despite the contributions made by this study, some potential limitations could be addressed by future research. First, due to a lack of data, we are not able to incorporate a measure that reflects the diverse intensity of a disability (Oh-Young and Filler, 2015 ) that could be associated with different costs (Nicoriciu and Elliot, 2023 ). Second, the datasets employed in this analysis are unavailable for certain years, precluding our use of data from ECE before 2011. Additionally, the variable indicating the language spoken in 2S was not present in the same dataset (CE) for the years 2018 and 2019. Finally, despite our efforts to mitigate concerns related to omitted variable bias, we concede the possibility of residual biases. Specifically, we omitted socioeconomic status from our analysis due to substantial rates of missing data.

Data availability

The datasets used in this study are available from the Peruvian Ministry of Education repository upon request.

In the literature, there are three main approaches: (i) segregation, (ii) integration, and (iii) inclusive (see e.g., Dixon, 2005 ; Kiuppis, 2014 ; Madhesh, 2023 ).

It is worth noting that results from countries like Peru are not directly comparable to those previously presented by Contreras et al. ( 2020 ). Indeed, academic performance in Peru is poorer relative to Chile, as reported by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and it does not receive monetary incentives to enroll children with SEN. Furthermore, Chile displays a particular institutional framework worldwide since state-subsidized private schools (voucher schools) have around 50% of total enrollment (CEM, 2019 ). Thus, insights from the Peruvian case are valuable for other comparable countries.

Although the ECE evaluates other subjects, only mathematics and reading were evaluated in every ECE. Students attending 2nd grade of primary were evaluated from 2007 to 2016 on mathematics and reading. In the case of students attending 2nd grade of secondary, they were evaluated on mathematics and reading from 2015 to 2019 (except 2017), social sciences in 2016 and 2018, and science and technology in 2018 and 2019.

Unfortunately, information for SG was not available before 2011, and the MINEDU did not provide information for 2014.

The ECE was not conducted in 2017.

Advancement and delay in 2P (2S) are determined based on the chronological age of the students as of March 31. If a student is one year younger than the standard age of 7 (13), it would be considered advancement. Conversely, if a student is one year older than the standard age, that is, age of 8 (14), it would be considered within a delay.

Since we only include schools with one section per grade, the number of SEN students reported by grade is used to account for the presence of SEN students at the section level.

A cohort refers to the students within the same section for each grade level and year.

Full-grade refers to primary schools where teachers do not teach more than one grade in the same classroom.

Since we work with schools that have only one section, school-fixed effects can also be understood as section-fixed effects.

Feigenberg et al. ( 2023 ) state that using a split-sample approach is equivalent to a fully interacted model but avoids losing statistical power. Likewise, they state that, unlike a model with only one interaction, the split-sample approach reduces bias due to omitted variables.

Results, including all control variables, are presented in the Supplementary Information. Tables S1 and S2 for reading and mathematics in 2P, respectively. Tables S3 and S4 for reading and mathematics in 2S, respectively.

Results, including all control variables, are presented in Supplementary Information Table S5 .

Results, including all control variables, are presented in Supplementary Information from Table S6 to Table S10 .

Ahmed A, Hammarstedt M, Karlsson K (2021) Do schools discriminate against children with disabilities? A field experiment in Sweden. Educ Econ 29(1):3–16

Article   Google Scholar  

Ainscow M, César M (2006) Inclusive education ten years after Salamanca: setting the agenda. Eur J Psychol Educ 21(3):231–238

Ammermueller A, Pischke J (2009) Peer effects in European primary schools: evidence from the progress in international reading literacy study. J Labor Econ27(3):315–348

Balestra S, Eugster B, Liebert H (2022) Peers with special needs: effects and policies. Rev Econ Stat 104(3):602–618

Burke M, Sass T (2013) Classroom peer effects and student achievement. J Labor Econ 31(1):51–82

CEM (2019) Estadísticas de la educación 2018. Publicación 2019. Centro de Estudios MINEDUC

Clarke D (2021) rwolf2 implementation and flexible syntax https://www.damianclarke.net/computation/rwolf2.pdf

Clarke D, Romano J, Wolf M (2020) The Romano-Wolf multiple-hypothesis correction in Stata. Stata J 20(4):812–843

Clogg C, Petkova E, Haritou A (1995) Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. Am J Sociol 100(5):1261–1293

Cole C, Waldron N, Majd M (2004) Academic progress of students across inclusive and traditional settings. Mental Retard 42:136–144

Congreso de la República (2003) Ley General de Educación. Ley 28044. https://leyes.congreso.gob.pe/Documentos/Leyes/28044.pdf

Congreso de la República (2006) Directiva No. 076-2006-VMGP/DINEBE https://www.minedu.gob.pe/normatividad/resoluciones/rd_0354-2006-ed.pdf

Contreras D, Brante M, Espinoza S, Zuñiga I (2020) The effect of the integration of students with special educational needs: evidence from Chile. Int J Educ Dev 74:102163

Cueto S, Rojas V, Dammer M, Felipe C (2018) Cobertura, oportunidades y percepciones sobre la educación inclusiva en el Perú. GRADE

de Boer A, Pijl S, Minnaert A (2012) Students’ attitudes towards peers with disabilities: a review of the literature. Int J Disabil Dev Educ 59(4):379–392

Dell’Anna S, Pellegrini M, Ianes D (2021) Experiences and learning outcomes of students without special educational needs in inclusive settings: a systematic review. Int J Incl Educ 25(8):944–959. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1592248

Dixon S (2005) Inclusion—not segregation or integration is where a student with special needs belongs. J Educ Thought 39(1):33–53

Google Scholar  

Edwards B, Cameron D, King G, McPherson A (2019) How students without special needs perceive social inclusion of children with physical impairments in mainstream schools: a scoping review. Int J Disabil Dev Educ 66(3):298–324

Feigenberg B, Ost B, Qureshi J (2023) Omitted variable bias in interacted models: a cautionary tale. Rev Econ Stat https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_01361

Filmer D (2008) Disability, poverty, and schooling in developing countries: results from 14 household surveys. World Bank Econ Rev 22(1):141–163

Fletcher J (2010) Spillover effects of inclusion of classmates with emotional problems on test scores in early elementary school. J Policy Anal Manag 29(1):69–83

Friesen J, Hickey R, Krauth B (2010) Disabled peers and academic achievement. Educ Financ Policy 5(3):317–348

Goico S (2019) The impact of “inclusive” education on the language of deaf youth in Iquitos, Peru. Sign Language Stud 19(3):348–374

Gottfried M (2014) Classmates with disabilities and students’ noncognitive outcomes. Educ Eval Policy Anal 36(1):20–43

Gottfried M, Egalite A, Kirksey J (2016) Does the presence of a classmate with emotional/behavioral disabilities link to other students’ absences in kindergarten? Early Child Res Q 36:506–520

Gottfried M, McGene J (2013) The spillover effects of having a sibling with special educational needs. J Educ Res 106(3):197–215

Hanushek J, Kain J, Rivkin S (2002) Inferring program effects for special populations: does special education raise achievement for students with disabilities? Rev Econ Stat 84(4):584–599

Kart A, Kart M (2021) Academic and social effects of inclusion on students without disabilities: a review of the literature. Educ Sci 11(1):1. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010016

Keslair F, Maurin E, McNally S (2012) Every child matters? An evaluation of “special educational needs” programmes in England. Econ Educ Rev 31(6):932–948

Kiuppis F (2014) Why (not) associate the principle of inclusion with disability? Tracing connections from the start of the ‘Salamanca process. Int J Incl Educ 18(7):746–761

Krämer S, Möller J, Zimmermann F (2021) Inclusive education of students with general learning difficulties: a meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 91(3):432–478. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654321998072

Kristoffersen J, Krægpøth M, Nielsen H, Simonsen M (2015) Disruptive school peers and student outcomes. Econ Educ Rev 45:1–13

Lavy V, Silva O, Weinhardt F (2012) The good, the bad, and the average: evidence on ability peer effects in schools. J Labor Econ 30(2):367–414

Lazear E (2001) Educational production. Q J Econ 116(3):777–803

Leigh A, Gong X (2010) Does maternal age affect children’s test scores? Aust Econ Rev 43(1):12–27

López Turley R (2003) Are children of young mothers disadvantaged because of their mother’s age or family background? Child Dev 74(2):464–474

Madhesh A (2023) The concept of inclusive education from the point of view of academics specialising in special education at Saudi universities. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:278

Manski C (1993) Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. Rev Econ Stud 60:531–542

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Mitra S, Sambamoorthi U (2008) Disability and the rural labor market in India: evidence for males in Tamil Nadu. World Dev 36(5):934–952

Nicoriciu A, Elliot M (2023) Families of children with disabilities: income poverty, material deprivation, and unpaid care in the UK. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10:519

Nilsen S (2020) Inside but still on the outside? Teachers’ experiences with the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs in general education. Int J Incl Educ 24(9):980–996

OAS (2018) Program of action for the decade of the Americas for the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities. OAS, Washington, DC

Olusanya B, Kancherla V, Shaheen A, Ogbo F, Davis A (2022) Global and regional prevalence of disabilities among children and adolescents: analysis of findings from global health databases. Front Public Health 10:977453

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Ombudsman P (2011) Los niños y niñas con discapacidad: Alcances y limitaciones en la implementación de la política de educación inclusiva en instituciones educativas del nivel primaria. Serie Informes Defensoriales, Informe 155. Lima, Defensoría del Pueblo

Ombudsman P (2019) El derecho a la educación inclusiva. Barreras en la implementación de los servicios educativos públicos y privados para estudiantes con discapacidad y con otras necesidades educativas. Serie Informes Defensoriales, Informe 183. Lima, Defensoría del Pueblo

Rangvid B (2019) Returning special education students to regular classrooms: externalities on peers’ reading scores. Econ Educ Rev 68:13–22

Rangvid B (2022) Special educational needs placement in lower secondary education: the impact of segregated vs. mainstream placement on post-16 outcomes. Educ Econ 30(4):399–425

Razavi S (2012) World development report 2012: gender equality and development—a commentary. Dev Change 43(1):423–437

Ruijs N (2017) The impact of special needs students on classmate performance. Econ Educ Rev 58:15–31

Ruijs N, Peetsma T (2009) Effects of inclusion on students with and without special educational needs reviewed. Educ Res Rev 4:67–79

Szumski G, Smogorzewska J, Karwowski M (2017) Academic achievement of students without special educational needs in inclusive classrooms: a meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 21:33–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.02.004

Oh-Young C, Filler J (2015) A meta-analysis of the effects of placement on academic and social skill outcome measures of students with disabilities. Res Dev Disabil 47:80–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.08.014

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

UNESCO (1994) T he Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Adopted by the world conference on special needs education: access and quality. UNESCO

Van Mieghem A, Verschueren K, Petry K, Struyf E (2020) An analysis of research on inclusive education: a systematic search and meta review. Int J Incl Educ 24(6):675–689. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1482012

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper was supported by the Peruvian Economic and Social Research Consortium (grant No. A1-PB03, CIES 2022). The authors express their gratitude to the participants of the XXXIV Annual Research Seminar 2023 hosted by the Economic and Social Research Consortium (CIES), as well as to two anonymous referees for their invaluable feedback, which contributed to the improvement of this manuscript. Special thanks to Juan Castañeda and Jonatan Amaya for their outstanding research assistance in earlier versions of this study. All remaining errors are our own.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Piura, Av. Ramón Mugica 131, Urb. San Eduardo, Piura, Perú

V. B. Salas García

Departamento de Economía, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Av. Universitaria 1801, Lima, 15088, Perú

José María Rentería

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All the authors contributed equally to this work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. B. Salas García .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

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

Supplementary information

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

Cite this article.

Salas García, V.B., Rentería, J.M. Students with special educational needs in regular classrooms and their peer effects on learning achievement. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 521 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03002-8

Download citation

Received : 09 November 2023

Accepted : 27 March 2024

Published : 17 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03002-8

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

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Research Grants on Education: Small

Application deadlines:.

Applications Open February 23, 2024

Full Proposal Deadline April 30, 2024 (12:00 noon Central Time)

Program contact: Cynthia Soto [email protected]

The Small Research Grants on Education Program supports education research projects that will contribute to the improvement of education, broadly conceived, with budgets up to $50,000 for projects ranging from one to five years. We accept applications three times per year.

This program is “field-initiated” in that proposal submissions are not in response to a specific request for a particular research topic, discipline, design, method, or location. Our goal for this program is to support rigorous, intellectually ambitious and technically sound research that is relevant to the most pressing questions and compelling opportunities in education.

Program Statement

The Small Research Grants on Education Program supports education research projects that will contribute to the improvement of education, broadly conceived, with budgets up to $50,000 for projects ranging from one to five years. Eligible investigators may also request additional supplemental funds for a course release. We accept applications three times per year. This program is “field-initiated” in that proposal submissions are not in response to a specific request for a particular research topic, discipline, design, or method. Our goal for this program is to support rigorous, intellectually ambitious and technically sound research that is relevant to the most pressing questions and compelling opportunities in education. We seek to support scholarship that develops new foundational knowledge that may have a lasting impact on educational discourse. 

We recognize that learning occurs across the life course as well as across settings—from the classroom to the workplace, to family and community contexts and even onto the playing field—any of which may, in the right circumstance, provide the basis for rewarding study that makes significant contributions to the field. We value work that fosters creative and open-minded scholarship, engages in deep inquiry, and examines robust questions related to education. To this end, this program supports proposals from multiple disciplinary and methodological perspectives, both domestically and internationally, from scholars at various stages in their career. We anticipate that proposals will span a wide range of topics and disciplines that innovatively investigate questions central to education, including for example education, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, sociology, law, economics, history, or neuroscience, amongst others.

Moreover, we expect and welcome methodological diversity in answering pressing questions; thus, we are open to projects that utilize a wide array of research methods including quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, ethnographies, computational modeling, design-based research, participatory methods, and historical research, to name a few. We are open to projects that might incorporate data from multiple and varied sources, span a sufficient length of time as to achieve a depth of understanding, or work closely with practitioners or community members over the life of the project.

April 2024 deadline

Eligibility and restrictions.

Eligibility

Proposals to the Small Research Grants on Education program must be for research projects that aim to study education. Proposals for activities other than research are not eligible (e.g., program evaluations, professional development, curriculum development, scholarships, capital projects, software development). Additionally, proposals for research studies focused on areas other than education are not eligible.

Principal Investigators (PIs) and Co-PIs applying for a Small Research Grant on Education must have an earned doctorate in an academic discipline or professional field, or appropriate experience in an education research-related profession. While graduate students may be part of the research team, they may not be named the PI or Co-PI on the proposal.

The PI must be affiliated with a non-profit organization or public/governmental institution that is willing to serve as the administering organization if the grant is awarded. The Spencer Foundation does not award grants directly to individuals. Examples include non-profit or public colleges, universities, school districts, and research facilities, as well as other non-profit organizations with a 501(c)(3) determination from the IRS (or equivalent non-profit status if the organization is outside of the United States).

Proposals are accepted from the U.S. and internationally, however, all proposals must be submitted in English and budgets must be proposed in U.S. Dollars.

Restrictions

Proposed budgets for this program are limited to $50,000 total and may not include indirect cost charges per Spencer’s policy . Eligible investigators may also request additional supplemental funds for a course release. See the Optional Supplemental Course Release section for details.

Projects proposed may not be longer than 5 years in duration.

PIs and Co-PIs may only hold one active research grant from the Spencer Foundation at a time. (This restriction does not apply to the administering organization; organizations may submit as many proposals as they like as long as they are for different projects and have different research teams.)

PIs and Co-PIs may not submit more than one research proposal to the Spencer Foundation at a time. This restriction applies to the Small Grants Program, Large Grants Program, Racial Equity Research Grants Program, and Research-Practice Partnership Program. If the PI or any of the Co-PIs currently have a research proposal under consideration in any of these programs, they are required to wait until a final decision has been made on the pending proposal before they can submit a new proposal.

How to Apply

The application process begins with a full proposal; there is no requirement to submit an intent to apply form. Full proposals for a Small Research Grant on Education are due by 12:00pm Noon central time on the deadline date.

Full Proposal Guidelines

Small Grant proposals must be submitted through an online application form following the guidelines below.

Step 1 – Registration

Note: This application is configured for the Principal Investigator (PI) on the project to register and submit the form. If someone other than the PI will be completing the online application (e.g., an administrative assistant), the PI should register as described in Step 1 below, then provide their username and password to the person assisting them with the application.

If you (the PI) have never accessed the Spencer Foundation online portal, you must register and create a profile by going to https://spencer.smartsimple.us and clicking the “Register Here” button. Follow the guidelines on the registration page to create your profile.

If you already have an account, log on to update your profile and access the application.

Step 2 - My Profile

After logging in, follow the directions to complete the information requested on the My Profile page and upload your current CV (10-page limit). The My Profile page is your online account with the Spencer Foundation whether you are applying for a grant, reviewing a proposal, or submitting a grantee report.

Note: If you will have Co-PIs on your project, they must also register and complete their profile information if they wish to be included on the application.

Step 3 – Start a Proposal

To fill out the application, go to your Workbench and click the Apply button for the Small Research Grants on Education. Your draft application can be saved so that you can return to it at a later time and continue working on it. Once you save a draft application, you can find it again on your Draft Proposals list on your Workbench.

Small Grant Proposal Elements

Within the online application, there are detailed guidelines for each section. Below is an overview of the elements you’ll be expected to complete.

Project Personnel - As the person creating the draft application, you will automatically be assigned to the proposal as the Principal Investigator. If there are Co-PIs on the proposal, they can be added to the application in this section.  They must first follow Steps 1 and 2 above before being added to the application.

In this section you are also asked to confirm that neither the PI nor the Co-PIs currently have another research proposal under review at Spencer (see Restrictions).

Proposal Summary – Information about the project is requested, such as the project title, start and end dates, the central research question(s), and a 200-word project summary.

Budget and Budget Justification - The budget form is divided into the following categories and each category has a pulldown menu of the line-item choices listed in parentheses below:

• Salaries (PI, Co-PI, Postdoctoral Research Assistant, Graduate Student, Researcher, Undergraduate Researcher, Other Research Staff, Other Staff, Supplemental PI Course Release, Supplemental Co-PI Course Release)
• Benefits (PI Benefits, Co-PI Benefits, Researcher Benefits, Other Staff Benefits, Tuition/Fees, Supplemental Course Release Benefits)
• Other Collaborator (Independent Consultant, Advisor)
• Travel (Project Travel, Conference or Dissemination Travel)
• Equipment and Software (Equipment, Software)
• Project Expenses (Supplies, Participant Stipends/Costs, Communication, Transcription)
• Other (This should only be used for expenses not covered in the choices above)
• Subcontracts (Information is pulled from the subcontract budget forms – see below)

Each expense for your project should be added and the budget narrative field should be completed, providing a description of that specific expense.  Detailed guidelines are available within the application form.

Subcontracts: If your project will have subcontracts, a separate subcontract budget form will need to be completed for each. The subcontract form has the same categories and line-item choices listed above.

Proposal Narrative - You are expected to upload a proposal narrative pdf that includes the following:

A description of the project, the central research question(s), and the project’s significance.

A rationale for the project. This includes (a) summary of the relevant literature, the relationship of the proposed research to that literature, and the new knowledge or contribution to the improvement of education expected to result from the proposed research; and (b) a summary of the conceptual framework or theory guiding the project and how the project utilizes or builds on this framework of theory.

A description of the proposed research methods, description of participants, data collection instruments, and modes of analysis the project will employ. If applicable to the proposed methods, please include (a) information about the proposed sample/case definition and selection procedures; (b) research design, including when appropriate a description of the context of the study; (c) description of key constructs, measures and data sources; (d) procedures for data collection; and (e) procedures for data analysis.

This narrative may not exceed 1800 words and at the conclusion should include the word count in parentheses. Your reference list should follow your narrative in the same pdf file and will not count toward the 1800-word limit.

The text should be double–spaced and in 12-point font. APA style is preferred.

Note: Tables and other figures can be included in the text of your proposal, where appropriate, provided they are used sparingly. The text contained in any tables and figures will not count towards the word limit. However, it is important that you describe or explain any tables or figures in the narrative portion of your proposal, which will contribute to your word count. Do not assume that tables and other figures are self-explanatory.

Project Timeline - A project timeline should be uploaded as a PDF file and should indicate the proposed start and end dates of the project as well as key project events and milestones. The major activities listed in the project timeline should be reflected in the proposal narrative. The project timeline may not exceed 1 page and the text should be in 12-point font. The proposed project duration can be up to 5 years.

Project Team – A document describing the project team should be uploaded in pdf format and should identify the roles, responsibility and knowledge base of the PI, Co-PI(s), and any supporting researcher(s). In the case where your project includes Co-PIs and other supporting researchers, this document should articulate how the team will work together to complete the research project, highlighting what each team member will contribute to the project. Further, a short description of the relationship between the project team and the research site may be included, if appropriate. This document should not exceed 250 words and should be double–spaced in 12-point font. Note: this document will be reviewed along with the CV of the PI and any Co-PIs included on the application.

Optional Supplemental Course Release – The Spencer Foundation recognizes that scholars' course loads vary significantly across the field creating differential contexts and capacities for research projects. To help mitigate these uneven demands on time, the PI or Co-PI may request supplemental course release funds of up to $10,000 over and above the $50,000 Small Grant budget limit, for a total of up to $60,000.

To be eligible, the scholar (PI or Co-PI) must have a course load of 6 or above per academic year. The supplemental funds cannot be used for anything besides a course release for the scholar and should be the standard rate for a course release at their institution. You may only request 1 additional course release per grant. Two things of note: 1) requesting the Supplemental Course Release funds does not guarantee they will be awarded, and 2) if you have a course load that is less than 6, you may still include a course release in your proposal budget, but your budget may not exceed the $50,000 Small Grants limit and you are not required to supply the documents requested below.

To apply for these the Optional Supplemental Course Release Funds, there are 3 additional application pieces needed:

• The amount requested and a brief budget narrative for the Supplemental Course Release should be included in the Proposal Budget section (detailed above). It should be clearly indicated in the Salary section of the budget form by choosing the appropriate Supplemental Course Release line item from the drop-down menu, as well as in the Benefits section as needed.
• A 250-word Course Release Rationale Statement describing how the additional course release will impact the proposed project should be uploaded as a PDF file.
• A Supporting Letter from the scholar's Dean or Chair should be uploaded below as a PDF file. The supporting letter must include the following: (a) confirmation that the scholar's course load is 6 courses or more per academic year, (b) confirmation that the scholar will be released from teaching a course, if awarded the supplemental funds, and (c) confirmation the budgeted amount for the course release is appropriate for their institution.

Optional Appendices A – If you have additional documents focused on scientific instrumentation relevant to the study, for example interview protocols or survey instruments, they can be uploaded in this section of the application as supplemental information.

Optional Appendices B – If you have other supporting documents, such as letters of agreement or collaboration, they can be uploaded in this section of the application. Please see the guidelines in the online application for more information about these types of appendices.

Optional Appendices C - Innovative Approaches to Equity in Research: We recognize that scholars and scholarship have continued to develop innovative approaches to conducting research in ethical and just ways. Scholars have raised that proposals attending to these issues in sophisticated ways often face choices in providing detail in their proposals. Thus, if you so choose , you are invited to upload a one-page appendix in your grant proposal to elaborate on the theoretical, methodological, and partnership structures, or other dimensions you deem as relevant to conducting ethical and just research. For example, if your work engages youth, families, or community-based organizations, you may want to elaborate on how traditional power dynamics will be addressed. Or, if your work engages with Indigenous communities, you may want to elaborate on the project leadership’s histories and engagement with Indigenous communities, any formal agreements (e.g. Tribal IRB or approvals), or the use of Indigenous methodologies in the project. Or, perhaps you are working on new quantitative measures or modeling approaches that would benefit from further explanation. We anticipate and welcome a wide range of other possibilities.

A note about IRB Approval: Proof of Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval is not required at the time of proposal submission.  In the event that IRB approval is needed for this project and it is chosen for funding, the Administering Organization will be responsible for obtaining IRB review and approval in accordance with its institutional policies and applicable law.

Resubmission – If this is a resubmission of a proposal previously submitted to the Spencer Foundation, you are asked to indicate this within the application and upload a 1-page explanation of how the proposal was revised.

Project Data – Within the online application, we ask you to choose the appropriate options with regard to your research project in the following categories: disciplinary perspective, methodologies, topics, geographical scope, contexts, and participants. This information is helpful in determining the appropriate reviewers for your proposal and for internal evaluations of our grant programs.

Signature from Authorized Representative of the Administering Organization – This section of the application details the steps necessary to obtain the authorized signature for your proposal through the Adobe E-sign process.  You are required to provide the Signatory’s name, title, and email address; this is normally an administrative or financial person that has the authority to sign the proposal on behalf of your organization. Note: The signature process must be completed by noon on the deadline date. You, as the applicant, are responsible for making sure your proposal is signed by the deadline.  Please account for the time it takes your organization’s authorized signer to review and sign proposal submissions.  We recommend filling in the online application at least a week ahead of the deadline date. The Spencer Foundation is unable to accept late submissions.

Once you’ve completed all of the elements listed above, click the Submit button at the bottom of the application page and it will be routed to your Signatory for signature and final submission.

Review Process

The Small Research Grants on Education program uses a peer review process for all eligible submissions.  Each proposal will be reviewed by both external panel reviewers and internal staff. The review process for this program takes approximately 6-7 months from the deadline date.

The review panel for this program is made up of scholars in the field of education research with expertise across many disciplines and methodological areas.  Panelist are asked to rate and comment on the following aspects of your proposal:

Significance of the Project: Reviewers will evaluate the centrality of education in the research, the importance of the topic to its field, and the quality of the research question(s) and/or direction of inquiry.

Connection to Research and Theory: Reviewers will evaluate the adequacy of the description of how other researchers have treated the same topic and how well the proposal responds to prior work and theory.

Research Design: Reviewers will evaluate the overall quality, sophistication, and appropriateness of the research design as well as its alignment with the research question(s) and/or conceptual framing.

Budget and Timeline: Reviewers will evaluate the adequacy of the budget and timeline.

Project Team: Reviewers will comment on the potential of the investigator(s) to complete the study as described and share the results or other findings.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q : Does this program support research in settings other than K-12 and higher education institutions?

A : Yes, Spencer funds research projects that span the life course (i.e., from early childhood to adult learning) as well as those that focus on contexts outside of school.

Q : Do you have a preference for certain research methodologies?

A : No, we are open to whatever methods make sense for answering the questions at hand. Historically, Spencer has supported research across a range of methods and academic disciplines, and we expect this to continue in this program.

Q : Do you have a preference for research teams vs. individual researchers?

A : No, we do not have a preference. The important thing is to plan the staffing around the aims of the project.

Q : Can a graduate student serve as a Co-PI on a proposal submission?

A : No, the PI and any Co-PIs named on the proposal are expected to have earned doctorate degrees prior to proposal submission.  While graduate students may be included in the budget as research assistants, this program is not meant to support student research projects.

Q : Do you accept proposals from outside the United States?

A : Yes, we accept proposals from outside the U.S. Application materials must be submitted in English and project budgets must be in U.S. dollars.

Q : Do you have a preference for regional, national, or international projects?

A : No, we do not have a preference.

Q : What is the expected duration of projects in this program?

A : We leave the duration of the project up to the PI/research team to determine, but limit it to no more than 5 years.

Q: Can my organization submit more than one proposal at a time?

A: Yes, as long as the proposals are for different projects and the research teams are different, it is fine for an organization to submit multiple applications at one time.

Q : If I (the PI or Co-PI) have a current grant through Spencer, can I apply for a new grant?

A : You may not hold more than one active research grant at a time from the Spencer Foundation. You may apply for a new grant while you have an active grant at Spencer if the active grant will end before the anticipated start date of the new project.

Q : If I am turned down, is it possible to revise my proposal and reapply in a later cycle?

A : Yes, Spencer welcomes proposal resubmissions. However, many factors go into the final decision on each proposal, including our limited budget. Even if you receive feedback on your proposal and are able to address all of the reviewer concerns in the submission, we can offer no guarantees as to the likelihood of funding due to the fact that we currently fund less than 10% of the submissions we receive. Please note, resubmissions are considered among all of the other newly submitted proposals and are not given special status or consideration in the review process.

Q : I have an idea for a project and would like feedback. Is it possible to contact someone?

A : If you have reviewed our program statement and application guidelines and still have questions about whether your idea for a research project falls within this program, feel free to email us at [email protected] for guidance. While we are not able to provide feedback on proposal drafts, we are happy to answer questions by email. Additionally, if helpful please consult the Spencer writing guides .

Q: How do I determine my start date and when should I expect payment if my proposal is selected for funding?

A: We recommend proposing a start date that is at least 8 months after the proposal deadline. The review process for this program takes approximately 6-7 months and once notified of the funding decision, it can take an additional 2 months for the official approval process, which entails reviewing the budget, processing award letters, and issuing the grant payment. NOTE: Grant payments are issued on the third week of each month. If Spencer has not received your signed award letters by your start date, your payment will not be issued.

Q: Are budgets expected to include in-kind giving or cost sharing? If not expected, is it allowed?

A: In-kind giving or cost sharing is not expected or required as part of your proposal budget. However, if you plan to include in-kind giving or cost sharing as part of your project budget, you should indicate this in the online budget form in the narrative section. If your proposal is chosen for funding, the grant award may be contingent upon receiving documentation confirming the additional support.

Recent Awardees

The Effects of Special Education on Crime Briana Ballis, Katelyn Heath University of California, Merced

Picturing Resilience: The Visual Narratives of Safety and Joy among Black Collegians Ashley Carpenter Appalachian State University

Precarity and Education: Examining the Experiences of Central American Unaccompanied Youth in California Public Schools Stephany Cuevas, Martha C. Franco Chapman University

Living in Tension: How Faculty and Staff at Evangelical Christian Colleges and Universities Support LGBTQ+ Students Kaitlin Gabriele-Black Salve Regina University

A Critical Race Content Analysis of Diversity in Children’s Books, from 2020-2021 Lorena Camargo Gonzalez Sacramento State Sponsored Research

Resource Inequality Across U.S. Colleges and Universities: New Evidence from Old Data Christopher M. Herrington Virginia Commonwealth University

Focusing on Multiplicative Foundations to Enhance Access to Calculus Andrew Izsak Tufts University

Echoes of Racialization in Danish High Schools:  Teachers’ Creative Negotiations of Policy in Work with Muslim Youth Reva G. Jaffe-Walter, Iram Majeed Khawaja Montclair State University

Understanding the Lives and Teaching of Migrant Teachers with Undocumented Backgrounds through the Lens of Community Cultural Wealth Yeji Kim University of Missouri – Columbia

Reimagining Spaces of Learning and Border Crossing through Narratives and Inquiries on Migration Wan Shun Eva Lam Northwestern University

Interrogating the Alignment of Current Statistical Methods with the Theory of Systemic Racism Michael K. Russell Boston College  

A Mixed Methods Examination of the Impacts of Climate Change Education on Students Sarah Schwartz, McKenna F. Parnes Suffolk University

Affordances of Makerspaces Influencing Biomedical Undergraduate Engineering Students' Design Learning and Curriculum Localization in Uganda and the USA Robert Ssekitoleko, Ann Saterbak Makerere University

The Influence of Anti-Critical Race Theory Legislation on Teacher Candidate’s Job Search Danielle Sutherland Towson University

Youth Writing for Peace in Colombia: A Collaborative Analysis of Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives Kate Vieira University of Wisconsin-Madison  

Find Out More About Us

The Spencer Foundation invests in education research that cultivates learning and transforms lives.

Board of directors.

Work at Spencer

Learn about Opportunities to Join our Staff

We are committed to diversity, equity and inclusion.

Find Out More About Our Legacy

Lyle M. Spencer established the Spencer Foundation in 1962 to investigate ways education, broadly conceived, might be improved.

Lyle M. Spencer

Who was Lyle M. Spencer?

Learn about our founder.

Spencer History

Our Path to the Present

Find out more about funding opportunities, what do we fund.

We support high-quality, innovative research on education, broadly conceived.

Research Grants

Field-Initiated Research Grant Programs

Training grants.

Fellowships for Scholars and Journalists

Read our news.

Recently Awarded Small Grants

Recently awarded large grants, announcement.

Spencer welcomes new Directors

Find out what we're learning, white paper.

Improving Equity in U.S. Higher Education: A Call for Equity-enhancing Opportunity Structures

Wall to Wall: Examining the Ecology of Racial and Educational Inequality with Research

Race-conscious Preparation and Support Approaches for Asian, Black, Latinx, and Native K-12 Leaders

Browse our resources and tools, resources and tools.

Grant Archive

Explore our Library of Past Awards

For applicants.

Resources and Tools For Applicants

Master of Education (M.Ed.) in Special Education – General Curriculum

Within my courses, candidates are provided many opportunities to engage in the actual practice of teaching while receiving the feedback necessary to gain fluency and confidence in their practice.

Kristin Sayeski

Associate Professor

Financial Aid

Application deadlines, news & events, contact information, request information.

The M.Ed. in Special Education is for students seeking a Master’s degree who have completed undergraduate training in a teacher education field and who have a teaching certificate. This advanced program includes the study of research methods and findings that allow students to become informed consumers of research and skilled practitioners. What makes the M.Ed. experience unique is the formal research conducted as part of the applied project.

The minimum 33 hours of coursework includes required courses and applied research individualized to the student’s career objectives. This allows students to gain advanced knowledge and skills in various special education topic areas and across the lifespan.

Master’s students are required to complete an applied project rather than a typical thesis. These projects consist of extensive research and writing a proposal while enrolled in an independent study course the semester prior to the project’s anticipated start.

Once the proposal is approved by the student’s advisor, it is implemented the following semester. The project is completed in the field with real students and actual strategies gleaned from the research. Completed works are presented to a graduate committee and must be approved by a clear majority before the student is allowed to graduate.

In this emphasis, coursework also includes:

• Characteristics of learning disabilities, including dyslexia
• Methods for individualized assessment
• Academic and behavior interventions
• Writing and strategy instruction in the content areas

Accreditations

The University of Georgia is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) to award baccalaureate, master’s, specialist, and doctoral degrees. The University of Georgia also may offer credentials such as certificates and diplomas at approved degree levels. Questions about the accreditation of the University of Georgia may be directed in writing to the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges at 1866 Southern Lane, Decatur, GA 30033-4097, by calling (404) 679-4500, or by using information available on SACSCOC’s website ( www.sacscoc.org ).

Tuition & Fees

Tuition rates and student fees can change each year. 

Based on 2022 credit hour cost, a person completing this program at the recommended pace would have paid $13,761 in tuition for a Georgia Resident and $34,650 in tuition for an out-of-state student.

Please use the  Estimated Cost Calculator  on the  Bursar’s Office website  to calculate one academic (Fall/Spring) year’s current tuition. 

Online students pay the following fees: Connect UGA, Green, and Technology. The total for those  fees in the fall semester of 2023 was $147  for students enrolled in exclusively online courses. 

Additional costs may include:

• Exam proctoring fees
• Technology upgrades 

Visit the  Office of Student Financial Aid  for information about financial assistance.

University System of Georgia Tuition Assistance Program (TAP)

The purpose of TAP is to foster the professional growth and development of eligible employees. For more information, see  Tuition Assistance  (refer to the Distance Learning section). 

Military Assistance

Active duty military, veterans, and military families should visit  Veterans Educational Benefits  to take full advantage of available financial assistance and educational benefits.

Admission Requirements

Professional preparation: Earned, or will have earned, a bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution before the date of enrollment at the University of Georgia.

GPA: Minimum cumulative undergraduate GPA of 3.0 for all courses taken.

The state requires that all candidates have a minimum 2.5 GPA on undergraduate or previous graduate work. Go to the Georgia Professional Standards Commission website for details.

Online Master of Education (M.Ed.) in Special Education – General Curriculum Application Checklist

• Application – Submit the Graduate School Admissions online.  Application fee: $75 Domestic/$100 International.
• Select Campus – Online 
• Select Degree Level – Masters
• Select Intended Program – (TBD)
• Select Intended Term –  Summer
• Résumé or curriculum vita – Submit online to the Graduate School.
• Statement of Purpose – Submit a one-two page statement of purpose online to the Graduate School. The statement of intent should clarify the candidate’s relevant background, interests, and goals in relation to the program.
• Transcripts – Submit unofficial transcripts from all institutions attended as part of the online application. Send official transcripts after you are offered admission.
• Letters of Recommendation  – Submit three letters of recommendation online to graduate school. Letters should be from individuals who can evaluate the applicant’s scholarly ability and potential for success in a graduate program.

Domestic Applicants

• Summer: April 1

International Applicants

• Summer: February 15

TOEFL: Foreign applicants will also need to score a minimum of 20 points each on the Speaking and Writing sections of the TOEFL with an overall minimum score of 80. Test scores must be within 5 years from the date of application.

33 Credit hours

Comprehensive exam.

 All students will take the Comprehensive Exam during their final semester in the program.

Program Handbook

Kelly J. Williams Professor

Kristin Sayeski Associate Professor

Bethany Hamilton-Jones Clinical Professor and Department Head

US News Ranks UGA Online Programs Among Nation’s Best

U.S. News & World Report released their 2024 Best Online Programs rankings with several of the University of Georgia online programs in the top 10.

Contact us using the request for information form or call 706-452-7945 .

Request Info

By submitting this form, you authorize the University of Georgia (UGA) to store the information you have provided on this form. You also authorize UGA to contact you by text message or phone call regarding your inquiry, including by automated texting or calling using the information you have provided on this form. If you provide additional phone numbers including wireless phone numbers to UGA, you also authorize UGA to use those numbers to contact you via any of the aforementioned methods. If you do not want your information stored, please email [email protected].

This site uses cookies.

If you have any questions please email us at [email protected] ..

• Write my thesis
• Thesis writers
• Buy thesis papers
• Bachelor thesis
• Master's thesis
• Thesis editing services
• Thesis proofreading services
• Buy a thesis online
• Write my dissertation
• Dissertation proposal help
• Pay for dissertation
• Custom dissertation
• Dissertation help online
• Buy dissertation online
• Cheap dissertation
• Dissertation editing services
• Write my research paper
• Buy research paper online
• Pay for research paper
• Research paper help
• Order research paper
• Custom research paper
• Cheap research paper
• Research papers for sale
• Thesis subjects
• How It Works

120+ Special Education Research Topics: That You Need to Know

Special education research topics study issues related to the quality of education people with disabilities get. Studying this field helps to improve the learning atmosphere for students with disabilities and address any challenges that they face. For instance, action research topics in special education help improve teachers’ classroom practices and how students adapt to the real world.

Social Issues Special Education Research Topics

Social media research topic in special education, best disability topics for research papers for your special education research, argumentative research topics for special education, easy special education thesis topics, current topics in special education for stem students.

• Conclusion 

You can use several interesting special education research topics in your essay. However, if you need help with educational research topics, read on to find a list of 120+ topics we have compiled.

Social issues research topics play a critical role in identifying problems and solutions that people deal with in a community. That makes it a vital element for people studying special ed research topics. We have compiled qualitative research topics in special education you can use.

• Ways that peer support can help children with disability socialize in the classroom
• What are the social challenges faced by special needs children in mainstream schools?
• A review of how to address the needs of a gifted child that has special needs
• Best ways to address the needs of students with emotional disorders in special education
• Special education feeds vs. school funding: Are there inequality issues?
• How can the education system offer an easy transition to children with special needs in early education?
• Strategies for creating a culturally responsive classroom
• Do educators who work with children with special needs need counseling?
• A look at how children with special needs transit from school to employment
• What are the best practices for developing social skills in students with autism?
• Is it fair to have alternatives to traditional testing for children with special needs?
• In what ways does special education help to promote social justice and Equality in Education
• How to identify students with hidden needs in special education
• What is the role of cultural competence in special education?
• Can poverty influence special needs outcomes?
• Assertive technology in special education: The review
• Are teachers for students with special education with low supply?
• Should those who teach special education get better pay?
• Can education improve the life of a student with special needs?
• Ways that technology can make it easy for educators to train kids with special needs

If you are looking for trending and interesting topics that will impress your professor, then consider choosing anatomy research paper topics or social media research paper topics . Note that the best special edu topic will help take your essay to the next level.

• How do social media help people with special needs in the community?
• A look at how social media has advocated for special education
• What role has social media played in cultural competency in special education?
• Ways that social media has created a voice for people with special needs and the importance of them receiving education
• A look at how social media has influenced adaptive physical education for people with special needs
• Assistive technology in connection with social media for individuals with special needs
• What is the impact of social media on people with hearing impairment?
• Do people with special needs use social media to network and find work?
• In what ways does social media impact the transition to adulthood for people with special needs
• Can social media affect how students with special needs perceive the world?
• Is there any role of social media for kids who need special education
• What is the role of social media in special education
• How to use technology and social media to improve the special education program
• How can social media help students with special needs get more confident
• What resources are available in social media that educators can use in their special needs classes?
• Do social media affect the image that people have of people with autism?
• How can teachers use social media to help kids with autism?
• How does social media bullying affect children on social media?
• Social media can be used to who special education and its importance
• Why it is time for special education to be showcased on social media platforms

One of the topics that students doing special education research have to study is disability because the topics are related. With this subtopic, you have various options ranging from economics research paper topics , to controversial topics in special education. Here is a list of options to choose from.

• Should suspending a student with a disability be an issue
• What can be done to improve the education of people with disabilities?
• Should children with severe disabilities be in a normal class setting?
• In what ways has technology made it easy for people with disabilities to get educated?
• A review of how a teacher’s academic background can affect students with disability
• How should teachers make children with disabilities feel part of the classroom?
• What are the benefits of post-education for adults with disability
• A look at inclusivity policies in public schools when it comes to children with disability
• Parents’ role in educating children with disability
• Mainstream classrooms vs. special classes for students with learning abilities
• How effective are peer support programs for students with disabilities in special education
• Strategies that can help promote social skills development in children with spectrum disorder
• What is the impact of language and communication barriers on the education of people with hearing impairment
• How does early intervention help to support kids with a disability?
• The importance of having community-based programs that help to support people with disability
• Why do teachers teaching special education need to be appreciated
• Can people with special education needs be taught online?
• How can the community help those who need special education to get it?
• Why do parents with special needs students need to work closely with teachers to give the child the best education?
• How should teachers handle the different learning paces of students with special needs in their class?

If well-researched and presented, argumentative essay topics for your special education essay might be best.  With the right topic and information research topics on special education, you can be assured of getting the best grades. You may also be interested in these ideas for biochemistry topics .

• A take on homeschooling for kids taking special education
• Does the size of the classroom affect the ability of the teacher to deal with students who need special education?
• Should special education students be sent to the next class even if they have not passed the current one?
• Should physical education be a compulsory lesson?
• Should the teacher’s proficiency in handling students with special needs to regularly tested?
• Should students with special education needs sit for the same exam as those who do not?
• In what ways can teachers avoid stereotyping?
• How can teachers understand a student’s uniqueness so that they can offer them the right training
• Why should children with special needs not pay extra?
• Why should teachers train on special education outcome
• Why should there be different learning strategies for students with a disability?
• Why are charter schools better for students with a disability?
• Funding for the special education
• What role do paraeducators play in special education classes?
• Do teachers teach students with special needs to require social skills training?
• What is the challenge of transitional planning for students with special needs?
• A review of Collaged admission for students with special needs
• What role does self-advocacy play in students with special education?
• How does remote learning for special education work?
• What are the effects of AHDH medication in schools for people with AHDH?

Are you looking for research topics for special education that are easy? We have compiled great thesis topic ideas for special education; read on and choose one that you can easily handle, and take to review our thesis statement about social media .

• How is co-teaching in an all-inclusive classroom effective?
• In what ways does self-determination impact children with disability
• Play therapy and why it is essential for children with special needs
• The effect of peer tutoring in special education
• What is the role of social skill training in special education
• Is it possible for any qualified teacher to teach children with special needs
• Parents and teachers have a role to play in special education
• Applied behavior analysis and Special education
• Picture Exchange Communication System and Special education
• Why should students with a disability be included in the standard classroom?
• Is mindfulness technique in special education effective
• How does music therapy in the classroom help kids with special needs?
• Analysis of Individualized Education Program in special education
• Visual support while teaching learners with special needs
• Why school psychology is necessary for special education
• Literacy Intervention in special education
• Why do students with disability need transitional planning?
• Speech-language pathologist in special education
• Why school inspection is important in schools dealing with students with special education
• Special education students and learning sciences

You can always go right when you choose current topics as your research in special education topics. If you are searching for a research topic for stem students , here are great topic ideas you can use.

• Comparing social interactions for special kids in stem schools
• Importance of an inclusive teaching approach for stem students with special needs
• What is the role of speech-language therapy in an inclusive environment?
• What performance challenges do special children face due to certain lacks?
• What is the effectiveness of sensory diets in special education
• Physical therapy in kids with disability
• What is positive reinforcement, and why is it important in special education
• What is the role of service learning in children with special education?
• Should special education schools approach stem subjects differently?
• In what ways can special school educators help kids avoid bullying
• How can parents with special needs students ensure better performance?
• Should there be a free education right for children with disability from elementary to college?
• What is the best environment for children with special needs to learn?
• Is it possible for mainstream teachers to teach special education?
• Story-based interventions in special education
• Assistive technology on math skills for students with disabilities
• Orientation and mobility specialist in special education
• What role does a behavior specialist in special education
• Should there be a school nurse in all special education schools?
• Video modeling in special education

Once you have the special education research paper topics you will use, you need to write a great paper or help me write my thesis . Students who need assistance with their research paper – whether with special ed topics or not, can now contact our paper writing service for exceptional work.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Mon - Sat 9:00am - 12:00am

• Get a quote

Explore well-crafted Special Education Research Topics Just with a click

Special Education Research Topics refer to specific areas of study within the field of education that focus on understanding and improving the educational experiences and outcomes of students with disabilities or special needs. Special education research thesis topics encompass a wide range of subjects that create difficulties for students to carry out research with ease. Therefore, we have initiated a fully functional research department to assist students.

Why do Students Find It Difficult to Carry out Research in Special Education?

Students conducting research in Special Education research topics face several challenges that can make their work more difficult. Some of these challenges include:

• Due to the highly individualized nature of special education thesis topics, findings might have limited generalizability to a broader population.
• Collecting data from individuals with disabilities might take more time due to communication challenges or the need for specialized assessment tools.
• Researchers must be cautious about potential biases and stereotypes while studying individuals with disabilities to ensure their findings are respectful and unbiased.
• Special education research often requires innovative methodologies that can accommodate the diverse needs of participants, which can be more challenging to design and implement.
• Funding for special education research might be scarcer compared to more mainstream educational research.

Get an Immediate Response

Discuss your requirments with our writers

Get 3 Customize Research Topic within 24 Hours

Undergraduate Masters PhD Others

List of Latest Special Education Research Topics 2023

Get benefits from the list of free special education research topics that are well-researched and written after deep analysis.

Deeply examine the practices and strategies of special education

To thoroughly investigate and grasp the ongoing strategies of specialized curriculum, including its difficulties, valuable open doors, and arising patterns.

Objectives:

• To examine the present status of special education, including strategies, programs, and informative methodology.
• To break down the qualities of existing practices in addressing the requirement of understudies with handicaps.
• To distinguish the significant difficulties and boundaries in the field of special education.

How “The Research Guardian” Can Help You A lot!

Our top thesis writing experts are available 24/7 to assist you the right university projects. Whether its critical literature reviews to complete your PhD. or Master Levels thesis.

Effective models for teaching students with disability

The point of an effective model for teaching students with disabled students is to investigate and assess different educational models that have proven to be viable in gathering the diverse learning necessities of students with disability.

• To lead a far-reaching survey of existing informative models for showing disabled students
• To determine the essential factor that influences the effective implementation of instructional models
• To evaluate the impact of these models on students learning, engagement, self-efficacy, and social interactions.

Models and theoretical frameworks

The aim is to investigate and analyze a variety of educational models and theoretical frameworks that guide instructional practices.

• To identify and classify a vast area of educational models and theoretical frameworks that are relevant to education.
• To look at the hypothetical establishments hidden in each model and system.
• To research the key standards, suspicions, and the idea that shape their way to deal with training.
• To examine how these theories help to comprehend students learning, motivation, and instructional design.

Get Help from Expert Thesis Writers!

TheresearchGuardian.com providing expert thesis assistance for university students at any sort of level. Our thesis writing service has been serving students since 2011.

Adaptation to curriculum for inclusive special education

It aims to investigate and examine efficient methods for adapting curriculum to accommodate students’ diverse needs in inclusive special education settings.

• To investigate a variety of strategies and examples for modifying the curriculum in inclusive special education.
• To evaluate the successful adaption strategies that will be beneficial for students to fulfill a variety of learning needs.
• To examine the effects of inclusive practices on academic achievement, student engagement, and self-esteem.

Collaboration and parental involvement in special education

The aim is to investigate the significance and advantages of special education collaboration between teachers and parents.

• To analyze the various types of collaboration such as strategies for communicating, making decisions together, settings goals, and sharing responsibility.
• To assess the effects of parental involvement and collaborative practices on special education student outcomes.
• To recognize the boundaries and difficulties that block collaboration between parents and teachers in special education.

Looking For Customize Thesis Topics?

Take a review of different varieties of thesis topics and samples from our website TheResearchGuardian.com on multiple subjects for every educational level.

Teacher training and professional improvement

It aims to investigate the significance of ongoing professional development and effective teacher training in special education.

• It evaluates the current special education teacher preparation programs.
• To examine their content, duration, delivery methods, and compatibility with special education best practices.
• To assess the knowledge and skills gap that prevents students from receiving effective instruction and support.

Assistive innovation in special education

The study aims to investigate how assistive technologies aid students with disabilities in their educational journey. Innovative assistive technologies and their use to improve students with disabilities’ access, participation, and learning outcomes are the focus of this study.

• To recognize and break down the most recent assistive advancement.
• To investigate technologies like robotics, virtual reality, adaptive software, sensory tools, and augmentative and alternative communication (acc) devices.
• To determine the impact of these technologies on student engagement, learning outcomes, and special inclusion.

Challenges in the implementation of special education

The aim is to identify the primary obstacle and challenges that prevent the effective implementation of special education programs and practices.

• To identify and classify the most significant obstacles and challenges encountered when implementing a special education program.
• To investigate the effect of difficulties in implementation on special education student outcomes.
• To examine a way in which students’ access to services, academic progress, and social-emotional development are impacted by constrain and barriers.

Monitoring student progress assessment

The research aim is to find efficient assessment methods that encourage accurate and meaningful progress monitoring, allowing teachers to make educated decisions regarding instruction and fostering student development.

• To examine various ways to deal with checking understudy progress in special education.
• To investigate observational exploration, contextual analysis, and best practices to decide the dependability of various evaluations.
• To examine how they affect outcomes for students and instructional decisions.

Promoting methods of inclusion

It aims to investigate inclusive policies, practices, and interventions that encourage students with disabilities to fully participate, engage and succeed in general education.

• It examines how these practices affect student achievement, social integration, and well-being as a whole.
• It examines what encourages inclusive education at the policy and system levels.
• To analyze how practices are used throughout the educational system to find areas of improvement.

How We Provide Assistance in Your SEND Dissertation Topics?

The Research Guardian plays a pivotal role in supporting students throughout their research journey. When you approach us for SEND dissertation topics, we help you navigate challenges, make informed decisions, and contribute meaningfully to the field of Special Education Research. Here is how we provide assistance:

• We provide support in analysing data for dissertation topics in special education, including guidance on using appropriate statistical methods and interpreting findings in the context of special education.
• When you buy special education dissertation topics, we can assist you in designing research studies that consider the various disabilities and individual differences within the special education population.
• Research guardians can assist students in selecting appropriate research methodologies for free special education dissertation topics that accommodate the unique needs of individuals with disabilities while maintaining scientific rigor.
• If funding is a challenge, you can buy our custom special education dissertation topics so that we help you identify potential sources of funding, write grant proposals, and secure financial support for your projects.

List of Free Special Education Dissertation Topics for 2022

Below is a list of Special Education research proposal topics at different levels. These topics are diverse and can cover a wide range of areas related to the education and support of individuals with special needs.

Meet Our Professionals Ranging From Renowned Universities

Related topics.

• Sports Management Research Topics
• Special Education Research Topics
• Software Engineering Research Topics
• Primary Education Research Topics
• Microbiology Research Topics
• Luxury Brand Research Topics
• Cyber Security Research Topics
• Commercial Law Research Topics
• Change Management Research Topics
• Artificial intelligence Research Topics