I absolutely loved the way you began your paper. It was extremely interesting and grabbed my attention as soon as I began reading. It made me want to hear more. I found Dr. Wolfensberger's idea of normalization to be crucial to the advancement of the "mentally retarded." Although it can be argued that the idea is obsolete, I still feel that it is important to praise Dr. Wolfensberger and his courage to bring such an important issue to light. There was no rights for people with intellectual disabilities at this time and it was the accepted norm to institutionalize them and hide them away from society. Although there were advocated for these individuals, such as their parents and family, there was nothing being done and no changes in the foreseeable future to change how they were treated.
I liked the idea of SRV that Dr. Wolfensberger later adopted and advocated for. I agree that this is a more acceptable term rather than normalization. The two strategies that were implemented with SRV seemed like things that every human being would strive to have in life. Some people at this time thought that the "mentally retarded" were not able to be educated which was far from the truth! Getting people to change this mindset and teaching these individuals with disabilities how to live a fulfilling life were the goals of SRV.
Although I feel that normalization is dated and that inclusion is more of an accepted modern concept, they both have a function. Normalization does not only relate to education and schooling, it mainly refers to the individuals with disabilities within their community. It deals with life skills and teaching them to be self-sufficient. Inclusion, on the other hand, relates to students within the educational setting and how they are thought of as an individual learner.
No comments:
Post a Comment