Research related to inclusive education has undergone significant transformations over the last two decades. The initial focus on integrating students with disabilities into mainstream classrooms has shifted to broader topics, such as dealing with systemic inequities, addressing social justice issues, and focusing on specific educational and cultural contexts. Despite the progress, there is still considerable variation across countries in the implementation of inclusive education (Ramberg & Watkins, 2020), and significant barriers exist in adopting inclusive education practices that meet the diverse needs of students. The major obstacles identified in the research are ingrained beliefs that hinder inclusion, educational context and school culture, insufficient teacher training, and a lack of institutional support (Mansauri et al., 2024; Morningstar et al., 2016). In addition, despite the teachers' positive attitudes toward inclusive education, the definition of positive or negative attitudes and how they affect teaching practices is often unclear (Altes et al., 2024). Moreover, current research in inclusive education often concentrates on the voices of educators, leaving the perspectives of students with disabilities underrepresented (Mangiaracina et al., 2021; Paul et al., 2022). Also, often policy and practice of inclusive education do not match (Atanasova & Papen, 2025). Thus, studying student, teacher experiences, and systemic barriers to inclusive education is important. 

This systematic review uses research findings from peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2024, to analyze (1) thematic approaches related to inclusive education, (2) methodological strategies used in inclusive education research, and (3) the barriers and challenges in inclusive education. The findings reveal that early research primarily focused on teacher attitudes, the impact of legislation on inclusive practices, and the strategies used in including students with disabilities (Ainscow & Miles, 2008). The key research gaps include teacher preparation and the mismatch between inclusive policy and practice. Influenced by Sustainable Development Goals, the scope of inclusive education research expanded to include analyses of systemic barriers to inclusive education, focused on multicultural aspects of learning, and explored higher education contexts. In addition, many researchers chose to analyze topics about diversity and equity (Miškolci, 2024) and the intersectionality of various diverse learner characteristics, for example, socioeconomic status, gender, race, and ethnicity (Downes et al., 2024). Finally, studies that showed interest in innovative pedagogies that enhanced student engagement (Wood, 2015) were also on the rise.

Methodologically, inclusive education research has shown some significant changes, too. Early research mostly used quantitative methods to measure student inclusion outcomes. However, more recent studies employ more qualitative and mixed-methods approaches, analyzing the lived experiences of students, teachers, and communities (Badstieber et al., 2024). Consequently, such studies present more complex and versatile aspects of inclusion in many contexts. In addition, more researchers chose to use comparative studies to analyze how inclusive education practices play out in specific cultural contexts. Yet, there is still a lack of studies from marginalized countries, and longitudinal studies on inclusive education practices are also scarce.

To address these gaps, further studies should examine teacher training and professional development, emphasizing specialized training to improve inclusive classrooms (Sánchez et al., 2019). Furthermore, knowledge in these areas can help bridge the divide between actual theory and practice in inclusive education. Consequently, more effective and equitable learning environments for all students can be created. Thus, this review emphasized the importance of collaboration between different educational stakeholders to find ways to implement the most equitable education for all students that are in line with the United Nations' 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

This study used a systematic literature review following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The review examined trends, methodologies, and gaps in inclusive education research using peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2024. Three research questions were addressed: (1) How has inclusive education research evolved thematically and methodologically? (2) What are the advancements and challenges in inclusive education research? (3) How can future research address the existing gaps in the literature? Based on the study‘s questions, a search was conducted across Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar using keywords such as “inclusive education,” “equity in education,” “teacher training for inclusion,” and “special educational needs,” combined with Boolean operators (AND/OR). The inclusion criteria included peer-reviewed articles, empirical and theoretical analyses published between 2000 and 2024, and studies addressing inclusive education in secondary and higher education settings. Articles related to policy evaluations and in languages other than English were excluded. After an initial title and abstract screening, 200 articles were shortlisted based on their relevance to the research questions and inclusion criteria. This initial selection of articles was chosen to have a variety of articles in the field of inclusive education, to examine many diverse approaches and methodologies. After reviewing the full texts of the articles, articles that were not relevant to the study objectives and lacked depth or empirical basis as well as those which focused only on policy analysis, were excluded. Finally, 33 articles that matched the goals of the review and addressed specific inclusive educational topics, such as teacher training, special needs, and intersectionality, were selected. The final sample was representative of the topics, matched the goals, and was manageable to analyze. While choosing the articles, such things as the date of publication, geographic region, the theme of the article (related to inclusive education), and methodologies used were considered. Thematic coding identified repeating patterns, including four intellectual schools: systems/structures, special education, accessibility/participation, and critical research fields. Descriptive statistics mapped out publication trends, while comparative analysis identified the differences among countries, revealing a noticeable overrepresentation of high-income countries. The findings from this systematic review provide a comprehensive understanding of the shifts in inclusive education research, showing both advancements and gaps in the research. This review aims to present findings based on the existing research and highlight future research, and classroom practices needed to move closer toward the goal of equitable education for all learners.

Based on the findings of this systematic review, noticeable transitions in topics and methodology have been identified over the past two decades. Early studies predominantly focused on integrating students with disabilities into regular classrooms and identified physical and academic barriers. Over time, research has transitioned to broader issues of equity, diversity, and intersectionality. In addition, more researchers explored the unique aspects of diverse learners in inclusive classrooms. Finally, the need to identify and remove systemic barriers preventing students from studying effectively has also been studied. In methodology, there was a shift toward more qualitative and mixed methods which allowed to study the lived experiences of those involved in the inclusive educational process. By highlighting the problems and challenges in inclusive practices, research has also identified the need to examine complex and diverse cultural contexts in which students study. This review also identified that certain geographical regions, especially marginalized and low and middle-income countries, do not have much voice in the inclusive education literature. Thus, comparisons across countries and over time, employing various methods are crucially important. To conclude, despite the significant transitions in inclusive education research, there is still much to be done. The inclusive context is complex, diverse, and ever-changing, and what worked or was needed a decade ago, may no longer be the best today. Thus, further research should address the diverse needs of students, especially those who face marginalization. Collaborative efforts should be directed toward understanding the key thematic patterns and transitions in both theory and practice, to find the best approach for inclusive education based on the cultural and geographic region and specific needs presented in the classroom. Researchers, teachers, principals, parents, students, and the whole community need to work together to find the best match between theoretical and practical approaches in an inclusive classroom.

Ainscow, M., & Miles, S. (2008). Making education for all inclusive: Where next?. Prospects, 38(1), 15-34. Altes, T. K., Willemse, M., Goei, S. L., & Ehren, M. (2024). Higher education teachers’ understanding of and challenges for inclusion and inclusive learning environments: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 100605. Atanasova, D., & Papen, U. (2025). UK university teachers on inclusive education: Conceptualizations, practices, opportunities, and challenges. Studies in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2025.2455431 Badstieber, B., Gasterstädt, J., & Köpfer, A. (2024). Reconstructive approaches in inclusive education: Methodological challenges of normativity and reification in international inclusion research. International Perspectives on Inclusive Education, 19, 171–185. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-363620220000019012 Downes, P., Li, G., Van Praag, L., & Lamb, S. (2024). The Routledge International Handbook of Equity and Inclusion in Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003282921 Mangiaracina, A., Kefallinou, A., Kyriazopoulou, M., & Watkins, A. (2021). Learners’ voices in inclusive education policy debates. Education Sciences, 11(10), 599. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11100599 Mansauri, M. C., Miller, A. L., Kurth, J. A., Ruhter, L., Wilt, C. L., Toews, S. G., & Morningstar, M. E. (2024). Teachers’ insights on cultivating inclusive education for students with complex support needs. Teachers College Record, 126(9), 118–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681241302637 Miškolci, J. (2024). Inclusive education as a call for a complex social and political change. Sociologia (Slovakia), 56(1), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.31577/sociologia.2024.56.5.18 Morningstar, M. E., Allcock, H. C., White, J. M., Taub, D., Kurth, J. A., Gonsier-Gerdin, J., Ryndak, D. L., Sauer, J., & Jorgensen, C. M. (2016). Inclusive education national research advocacy agenda: A call to action. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 41(3), 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796916650975 Paul, T., Di Rezze, B., Rosenbaum, P., Cahill, P., Jiang, A., Kim, E., & Campbell, W. (2022). Perspectives of children and youth with disabilities and special needs regarding their experiences in inclusive education: A meta-aggregative review. Frontiers in Education, 7, 864752. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.864752 Ramberg, J., & Watkins, A. (2020). Exploring inclusive education across Europe: Some insights from the European agency statistics on inclusive education. In FIRE: Forum for International Research in Education (Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 85-101). Lehigh University Library and Technology Services. Sánchez, P. A., Rodríguez, R. H., & Martínez, R. M. M. (2019). Barriers to student learning and participation in an inclusive school as perceived by future education professionals. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 8(1), 18–24. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2019.1.321 Wood, D. (2015). Problematizing the inclusion agenda in higher education: Towards a more inclusive technology-enhanced learning mode. First Monday, 20(9). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i9.6168