The focus of debate around the issue of equity and schooling has concentrated mainly upon access as a rights conditional to social justice, rather than the curriculum undertaken by students who are included in regular schools. This study first sought to describe and find priorities for the curriculum needs of young adolescents with Mild Intellectual Disabilities (MID) and second, to determine criteria by which stakeholders might evaluate the appropriateness of curriculum undertaken by MID students. Individuals from a spread of stakeholder groups were surveyed. The stakeholder groups were teachers, parents, peers, employers, community agency professionals, administrators and taxpayers. Results indicated that: the content and outcomes of non- academic curriculum domains were clearly favoured over those of the traditional academic curriculum domain; the students' highest priorities (ie, of social adjustments and life skills) were not reflected in the assessment records given most attention by teachers and the educational system; alternative programs and assessment models were recognised by stakeholders as most important to school and post- school outcomes; community- referenced, ecologically planned, cross- contextual learning was valued highly but not readily available; while employers favoured more academic domain engagement for MID adolescents than did other stakeholders, they placed greatest importance on non- academic skills (eg, punctuality and impulse control) of employees; and proximal stakeholders and employers favoured earlier and more workplace experience for MID adolescents. The results have been used to propose several criteria for appropriate curriculum.