Background: Inclusive education reforms have expanded the use of integrative measures in Swiss mainstream classrooms, yet their long-term implications remain insufficiently understood. Two measures are central: reduced individual learning objectives (RILOs) and accommodations. RILOs lower subject specific expectations for students with low cognitive ability and are formally documented in school reports without requiring diagnosis. Accommodations support students with average or above average ability and specific disabilities in meeting standard objectives; they typically require diagnosis and are not recorded in school reports. Findings from the Bernese Longitudinal Study on Integrative School Measures (BELIMA) show that these measures are socially selective and differ in their short-term academic effects (Sahli Lozano et al., 2023). Research Question: This study investigates how RILOs and accommodations influence students’ transitions into upper secondary education. Drawing on labeling theory (Fox & Stinnett, 1996; Goffman, 2009) and signaling theory (Spence, 1973), it examines whether these measures convey information about students’ academic potential that affects access to programs with varying academic demands and contributes to discontinuities in educational trajectories. Methods: The study uses BELIMA data from 2,297 students in Canton Bern, including 85 students with RILOs and 77 with accommodations. Propensity score matching was applied to address selection bias, controlling for school type, academic performance, intelligence, and social background. Outcomes include entry into upper secondary programs with differing academic requirements and the continuity of educational trajectories. Results: Students with RILOs were significantly more likely than matched controls to enter programs with lower academic demands, particularly two-year apprenticeships. However, RILOs were not associated with a higher likelihood of discontinuous educational trajectories. Students receiving accommodations did not differ significantly from matched controls in either the academic level of upper secondary placement or pathway continuity. Conclusion: The findings indicate that RILOs, although intended to support students with learning difficulties, may inadvertently channel them into less academically demanding pathways. Accommodations, in contrast, do not appear to restrict educational opportunities. These results demonstrate that integrative measures differ substantially in their long-term effects and that they function as institutional signals within educational decision-making processes. The study underscores the need to critically examine implementation practices to ensure that support measures enhance rather than constrain students’ prospects. Despite limitations such as small subgroup sizes, the findings contribute important evidence to an understudied area and highlight the necessity of further research on the long-term consequences of inclusive education policies.

Fox, J. D., & Stinnett, T. A. (1996). The effects of labeling bias on prognostic outlook for children as a function of diagnostic label and profession. Psychology in the Schools, 33(2), 143–152. Goffman, E. (2009). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Touchstone. Sahli Lozano, C., Wüthrich, S., Wicki, M., & Brandenberg, K. (2023). Soziale Selektivität bei der Vergabe der integrativen schulischen Maßnahmen reduzierte individuelle Lernziele, Nachteilsausgleich und integrative Förderung. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 26, 997–1027. Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374.