As a result of international efforts within the last two decades, there has been a growing momentum towards more inclusive educational provision in general education settings, especially within elementary schools. For example, the Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) recognized the global necessity and urgency for students with special educational needs to be educated within the regular education system. In addition, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with a Disability (The United Nations, 2006) adopted a social model of disability emphasizing institutional barriers that inhibit full access and active participation in education and society. It is increasingly argued that students identified as having special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) will particularly gain social benefits (Lindsay, 2007) as well as academic (Frederickson, Dunsmuir, Lang, & Monsen, 2004) by being more included in general education classrooms. Inclusive settings are seen by parents and educators as providing more opportunities for enhanced social outcomes, such as social support, increased friendships, social interactions with peers and active participation in social and play activities (Boer, Pijl, & Minnaert, 2010; Symes & Humphrey, 2011). Parents in particular hope that their child can build positive relationships with typically developing peers (Koster, Pijl, Nakken, & Van Houten, 2010). This study examined the social networks of students with SEND in an effort to understand how the degree of a socially responsive classroom may have an impact on the social inclusion, participation and social support of these students and their peers. A critical case study design (Yin, 2009) grounded in social capital theory drove the study. In particular, social support was examined as a main function of social capital. Data were collected from one elementary school in Southern California across two grade 4 classrooms, where 41 students participated in a social network questionnaire and 31 students took part in semi-structured interviews. One of the two classrooms appeared to be more socially responsive and the results have indicated that SEND students were well connected to their classmates, were as popular and had as many friends as their peers without SEND. The differences between the two classrooms became apparent through both the social network and interview data. These findings have important implications for educational practice and research in terms of the inclusion and participation of SEND students in general education settings. In the presentation the implications within the wider context of special and inclusive education will be discussed.

Boer, A. D., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2010). Attitudes of parents towards inclusive education: A review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 25(2), 165-181. Frederickson, N., Dunsmuir, S., Lang, J., & Monsen, J. J. (2004). Mainstream‐ special school inclusion partnerships: Pupil, parent and teacher perspectives. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(1), 37-57. Koster, M., Pijl, S. J., Nakken, H., & Houten, E. V. (2010). Social Participation of Students with Special Needs in Regular Primary Education in the Netherlands. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 57(1), 59-75. Lindsay, G. (2007). Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 1-24. Symes, W., & Humphrey, N. (2011). School factors that facilitate or hinder the ability of teaching assistants to effectively support pupils with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) in mainstream secondary schools. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 11(3), 153-161. The United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Treaty Series, 2515, 3. UNESCO (1994). Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.