Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 971

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

British Educational Research Journal

Open access
·2013·British Educational Research Journal

Abstract

The increasing heterogeneity of learning needs and preconditions in inclusive mainstream classrooms entails that not all learners are equally able to meet the regular learning objectives.In response, various integrative measures have been implemented to tailor instruction to students' individual needs.However, limited empirical evidence exists on how such measures shape students' subsequent educational pathways.The present study focuses on curriculum modifications, a measure for low-achieving students that entails individualised adaptations of learning objectives, and examines their association with educational pathways in secondary education, using Switzerland as a case study.Drawing on stigma and signalling theories, the study investigates whether receiving curriculum modifications is linked to differential educational trajectories.The analysis is based on large-scale, administratively linked test score data from four Swiss cantons and employs a propensity score matching approach to account for the multidimensional differences between students who received curriculum modifications and those who did not.Results from a series of logistic regression models indicate that students receiving curriculum modifications are more likely to enter less academically demanding educational pathways and to experience disruptive educational transitions than comparable students without curriculum modifications.These findings suggest that, despite their intention to promote inclusion, curriculum modifications may inadvertently pose K E Y W O R D S curriculum modifications, educational pathways, inclusive education, propensity score matching, register data, secondary education, special educational needs, Switzerland, vocational education and training Key insightsWhat is the main issue that the paper addresses?The paper examines how receiving curriculum modifications, a measure that foresees individualised adaptations of learning content and objectives, affects students' educational pathways in secondary education.This paper contributes to a deeper understanding of the potential unintended consequences of curriculum modifications for students' long-term educational outcomes. What are the main insights that the paper provides?Drawing on large-scale, administratively linked test score data and following a propensity score matching approach, the analyses reveal that students receiving curriculum modifications are more likely to enter less academically demanding educational programmes.Despite their inclusive intent, curriculum modifications may inadvertently pose an obstacle for students' educational pathways.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/(issn)1469-3518

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 971

Metadata

Venue
British Educational Research Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-02-01
ISSN
0141-1926 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4251476222
Cited by
971
References
0
Type
paratext
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: British Educational Research Journal. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/(issn)1469-3518
The paper
British Educational Research Journal. (2013). British Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/(issn)1469-3518

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.