Syntes: Oh-Young & Filler (2015) — students with disabilities in more integrated settings outperformed those in less integrated settings

Källa: 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. Research in Developmental Disabilities 47, 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.08.014

Verified content

• [abstract] 24 studies published in peer-reviewed journals from 1980 through 2013.
• [abstract] Significant differences between placement settings (p < 0.0001); the majority of students with disabilities in more integrated settings outperformed those in less integrated settings on both academic and social outcome measures.
• [abstract] Combined with two earlier metas, the authors say the evidence spans more than 80 years and suggests separate settings are not as beneficial as more integrated ones.

Limits

• [assessment] Abstract only; no pooled effect size. The abstract does not say whether the outcomes are achievement levels or gains over time. C31 already distinguishes those: cross-sectional levels can favour inclusion even when longitudinal gains do not (Krämer, Möller & Zimmermann 2021). The 2026-11-07 nightly search described this paper as level comparisons, not growth.

Why it is in the library

C31's living sentence says placement has not been shown to change how fast achievement grows, while conceding higher levels in inclusive classes. This widely cited meta-analysis is often read as showing an inclusion advantage; the abstract supports better academic and social outcomes in more integrated settings but does not separate growth from level, so it bounds how the claim should be read rather than killing the growth clause.

Added 2026-11-08 by the project (weekly source sweep, kind: old; read: abstract). [abstract] = from the published abstract; [full text] = read in the full text; [assessment] = the project's own assessment.