Inclusion is a feeling, not a place: a qualitative study exploring autistic young people’s conceptualisations of inclusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates from their perspectives, the educational experiences of twelve autistic young people (aged 11–17 years) for whom mainstream was, or is, challenging. This paper focuses on one theme from this study and presents how these young people experience, define and conceptualise inclusion. A flexible qualitative participatory approach was used incorporating a range of methods, including: one-to-one semi-structured interviews; draw and write activities; a beans and pots activity; and, diamond ranking activities. These methods, and the topics discussed, were developed by an advisory group of three young people.Outcomes of this study suggest that mainstream school is not suitable for all autistic young people. Inclusion, for them, is not synonymous with mainstream and can occur in any school. They defined inclusion as belonging, being valued and wanted as a person by teachers, of fairness and of being afforded the necessary support to access and thrive in education. In short, inclusion is a feeling (a sense of belonging), not a place (mainstream or otherwise).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".