For the past few years there has been a growing debate with respect to the social aspects of inclusion. A number of studies (Nakken and Pijl, 2002; Koster at al., 2007) have drawn attention to the advantages of inclusive education compared to segregated provision by highlighting the social benefits of the former. Many educationalists also emphasise the positive social aspects that inclusion may bring to pupils identified as having special educational needs. Parents of children who have been identified as having special educational needs especially appreciate the possibilities for social interactions and friendships. Despite that, the systematic assessment of the social outcomes of inclusion has lagged behind that of the assessment of academic outcomes. This is particularly problematic in light of research evidence (Porter et al., 2008, 2010; Mamas, 2012; Koster et al., 2007) supporting concerns about peer rejection, bullying and marginalisation.

The social inclusion of pupils identified as having special educational needs has been a key concept within and beyond education. As a concept, it is highly contentious and has been defined in a variety of ways. Koster et al. (2007) argue that social inclusion comprises many aspects, such as acceptance, interaction, relationships, social status, friendships, and bullying. For example, Ring and Travers (2005) define social inclusion in terms of pupils’ sociometric status, the frequency and nature of interactions with peers and the number of acknowledged and unacknowledged initiatives to make contact with peers. Similarly, Frederickson and Turner (2003) evaluate social inclusion through sociometric methods, including a sociometric rating scale, peer nominations and play-rating scale. 

Despite the growing interest in the field of social inclusion within education, important relational factors that shape or have a contribution towards the social inclusion and participation of all students in the classroom remain largely unexplored. For example, the interactive relationship between social and academic aspects of inclusion (Mamas, 2012) calls for more research to fill in a considerable gap in current studies in the field of inclusive and special education. Mamas (ibid) suggests that there is a strong interrelationship between social and academic inclusion, implying that the more a student is socially included and/or participating within the classroom and wider school the more likely is for this student to be more academically included and vice versa. In a national study investigating ways of accessing pupil voice about barriers and supports to learning, Porter et al. (2008, 2010) found that disabled pupils reported that positive and negative aspects of peer relationships acted as supports and barriers to learning respectively, and that this became increasingly important to pupils as they moved though primary and into secondary school.

The overall aim of this research is to explore the social inclusion of students identified as having special educational needs and compare it with that of their peers in four mainstream primary schools in Devon. There is evidence that the relationships with peers take on increasing significance for disabled pupils as they move through school (Georgeson, 2012). In addition, the relationship between social and academic inclusion will be examined further, as this relationship emerged as dynamic and strong in a recent PhD research study in Cyprus (Mamas, 2009). Therefore, this study addresses two main research questions:

1. What is the social inclusion status of students identified as having special educational needs in mainstream primary education?
2. What is the relationship between social and academic inclusion? 

Christie, F. (2002). Classroom Discourse Analysis: a functional perspective. London: Continuum. Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design – Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks – London – New Delhi: SAGE. Frederickson, N. and Turner, J. (2003). Utilizing the Classroom Peer Group to Address Children's Social Needs. The Journal of Special Education, 234-45. Georgeson, J.M. (2006). Differences in preschool culture: organisation, pedagogy and interaction in four selected settings. Unpublished thesis, University of Birmingham. Georgeson, J.M. (2012). Methodological issues in accessing children’s views: using interviews and questionnaires Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences 47 1605–1609. Greene, J.C. (2007). Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry, San Francisco: WILEY. Halliday, M.A.K. and Matthiessen, C. M.I.M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Hodder Arnold. Koster, M., Nakken, H., Pijl, J.S. and Houten, E. (2007). Being part of the peer group: a literature study focusing on the social dimension of inclusion in education, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1-24. Mamas, C. (2009). Getting Along with Peers in Mainstream Primary Schools: An Exploration of the Social Status of Pupils Identified as Having Special Educational Needs in Cyprus. Cambridge: Unpublished PhD Thesis. Mamas, C. (2012). Pedagogy, Social Status and Inclusion in Cypriot Schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1223-1239. Monchy, M.D, Pijl, S. and Zandberg, T. (2004). Discrepancies in judging social inclusion and bullying of pupils with behaviour problems. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 317-30. Nakken, H. and Pijl, S.J. (2002). Getting along with classmates in regular schools: a review of the effects of integration on the development of social relationships. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 6(1), 47-61. Ring, E. and Travers, J. (2005). Barriers to inclusion: a case study of a pupil with severe learning difficulties in Ireland. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 41-56. Scott, J. (2012). What is Social Network Analysis? New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Scott, J. (2013). Social Network Analysis (3rd ed.). London: SAGE. Porter J., Daniels, H. Georgeson J., Feiler A., Hacker J., with Tarleton B., Gallop V., Watson D. (2008). Disability Data Collection for Children’s Services. Research Report submitted DCFS-RR062. Nottingham: DCSFok of Special Education. Porter, J., Daniels, H., Martin, S., Hacker, J., Feiler, A. and Georgeson, J., (2010). Testing of Disability Identification Tool for Schools Department for Children, Schools and Families. Research Report DFE-RR025.