Development of Special Education Classes in Mainstream Schools in China: Barrier or driver for Inclusive Education?

• In Event: Implementing Inclusive Education for Learners with Disabilities: Policies, Practices, and Global Perspectives

Proposal

Inclusive education has emerged as a central tenet of global education reform, promoting equitable access for all students. While international agreements emphasize placing students with disabilities in mainstream classrooms, many systems utilize alternative placements like Special Education Classes (SEC), where students receive specialized instruction for part of the day within a mainstream school. The utility of SEC is highly contested. Proponents argue they offer targeted curricula for students with complex needs and can serve as a crucial bridge from segregated to mainstream settings (Kauffman et al., 2018). Conversely, critics warn that SEC carry a significant risk of segregation and labeling, potentially reducing the motivation for schools to enact comprehensive inclusive reforms (Kenny, McCoy, and Mihut 2020). China provides a compelling case for examining this debate, as SEC have been a legally mandated placement for over forty years, evolving alongside the nation's profound socioeconomic transformations (Deng and Zhu, 2016). The country has developed a unique "parallel system," simultaneously advancing both inclusive education and separate special education schools, making the role of SEC particularly complex and worthy of study (Fu, 2022).
This study analyzes the four-decade evolution of SEC in China by integrating multi-level data. The research framework considers the interplay of three dimensions: national policy (laws and resource allocation), academic research (scholarly literature), and regional practice (implementation models and challenges). The analysis draws on a systematic review of 115 peer-reviewed academic articles, a comprehensive analysis of national and local policy documents, and a case study of Shanghai, the city that pioneered SEC in China. Using this evidence, the history of SEC is divided into three distinct phases, with their shifting functions captured through metaphorical representations: an unconscious pioneer, a struggling follower, and a strategic partner.
The first phase, the flourishing phase (1979–1993), positioned SEC as an "unconscious pioneer" for inclusive access. Originating in Shanghai in 1979 to address the near-total exclusion of students with intellectual disabilities, the SEC model was a low-cost, effective solution for increasing school enrollment rates. Its success led to rapid local expansion and, subsequently, national endorsement. The 1986 Compulsory Education Law formally established SEC as a key placement, and throughout this period, national policies consistently prioritized SEC over other inclusive models like Learning in Regular Classrooms (LRC). This policy support fueled a dramatic expansion, with SEC placements growing from under 7% to over 52% of all special education placements by 1993, breaking the rigid boundary between general and special education.
This was followed by the stagnation phase (1994–2016), where SEC became a "struggling follower." Influenced by global trends promoting full inclusion, China's policy focus shifted decisively toward LRC as the orthodox model. This, combined with a period of rapid economic growth that funded the construction of new, large-scale special education schools, undermined the legitimacy and necessity of SEC. Students were increasingly moved from SEC into either LRC or newly built special schools. As a result, SEC placements plummeted to less than 1% by 2016. Academic interest also waned, and the model was largely marginalized in both policy and practice, even while it continued to provide essential access in some rural areas.
The current resurgence phase (2017–present) has repositioned SEC as a "strategic partner" for inclusive quality. This shift was prompted by a growing recognition that the LRC model had limitations, often failing to provide adequate support for students with more significant needs. As China's special education agenda moved from a focus on access to one of quality, policymakers and researchers began to re-evaluate the role of SEC. This renewed interest is evident in the sharp increase in academic publications and, more concretely, in practice. In Shanghai, for example, SEC placements have rebounded to over 12% by 2023. Crucially, this practical shift has been cemented by new national policies that explicitly encourage the establishment of SEC, framing them as a primary component of the special education service system alongside LRC.
In conclusion, the evolution of SEC in China reveals a dynamic journey from a tool for access to a marginalized option, and now to a strategic partner in achieving high-quality, "appropriate inclusion." This history has produced a distinct, government-led "Chinese SEC model" shaped by a pragmatic focus on national policies promoting universal education (Zhang & Deng, 2023). This experience challenges the binary view of SEC as solely a barrier to inclusion. Instead, it suggests that SEC can be a vital component of a pragmatic "gradual realization" pathway, creating a flexible continuum of support to meet diverse student needs. To ensure their sustainable development, however, China must address three systemic challenges. First, the research landscape, currently heavily descriptive, needs to be balanced with more intervention and attitudinal studies to build a stronger evidence base. Second, a national institutional framework is needed to create clear, operational guidelines for SEC regarding standards, funding, and staffing. Finally, the professionalization of practice must be improved through the development of national curriculum frameworks and continuous teacher training to ensure high-quality, individualized instruction for all students.

References
Deng, M., & Zhu, X. (2016). Special education reform towards inclusive education: Blurring or expanding boundaries of special and regular education in China. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 16(1), 994–998.
Fu, W. Q. (2022). Inclusive education in China: Ideas, practices, and challenges. Routledge.
Kauffman, J. M., Hallahan, D. P., Pullen, P. C., & Badar, J. (2018). Special education: What it is and why we need it (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Kenny, N., McCoy, S., & Mihut, G. (2020). Special education reforms in Ireland: Changing systems, changing schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(1), 1–20.
Zhang, L., & Deng, Y. (2023). Toward a high-quality system: A critique of Chinese special education policy development and the guidelines for the evaluation of the quality of special education schools. ECNU Review of Education, 6(3), 1–12.

Author

• Han Zhu, East China Normal University