Inclusion, being the process of
educating students with disabilities in the general classroom, is designed to
make life for those with disabilities as culturally normative as possible
(Jiminez and Graf 71). Educators, parents, and members of society have very strong
and differing opinions regarding the practices of inclusion and whether it is
actually beneficial or not. As far as arguments supporting inclusion go, it
does help the disabled learner fit in more easily than if the student were
isolated from their peers. As mentioned before, inclusion is an extension of
the normalization principle and helps make life as normal as it can be for the
student. On the other hand, some question the benefits of inclusion for some
students. In our text on page 73, Jiminez and Graf state, “Disability is
something to be treated with special procedures, which are sometimes best
implemented in separate placements, in order to remediate the deficit or impairment.”
Therefore, some believe that in this case, inclusion is not necessarily
helpful. The ultimate goal is to do what is best for the child, and if
inclusion is not what is best, it shouldn’t be forced upon the student. In
addition, it is my belief that some educators do not want to accept inclusion in
their classrooms for a variety of reasons. One of these reasons is that it can
be challenging for the teacher to teach to all the levels in their classroom,
and some probably don’t want to be bothered to do so.
As far as contributing factors to
opinions on inclusion go, stigmas surrounding students with disabilities affect
the way that both educators, students, and teachers view the practice. I think
some parents may believe that having students with disabilities in the general
classroom slows the pace of the class and takes away from their child’s education.
As mentioned before, I think that some educators are lazy and inclusion
practices take a lot of work, which would deter them from welcoming it in their
classroom. As far as inclusion of children with disabilities in school programs
and extra-curricular programs goes, I think they should have the same opportunities
as other children. As a part of IDEA, they are entitled to the same opportunities
as the general public in their communities, and extra-curricular activities shouldn’t
be an exception. As educators, it is our responsibility not to be lazy with
students, but to help them be normalized as much as possible, and inclusion is
a good place to start.
I very much agree that the ultimate goal is to do what is best for the child. Many students with mild to moderate disabilities should be placed in an inclusion class. However, if the students disability is more severe, they are best placed in a setting where the teachers are special trained. I too agree with your assessment of lazy educators who want no part of inclusion. It is a same that teachers do not want what is best for their students.
ReplyDeleteI think more often than not it's not that a teacher is lazy, but they weren't educated enough to teach students with disabilities. Most general education teachers take one class about special education, which we know is not nearly enough. I find majority of the time programs are implemented without enough training and buy in from staff, which in turn makes the program have negative effects. It would be much easier to take the time to train staff correctly than to try to fix the problems that occur when they are not trained correctly.
ReplyDeleteI agree, I think more often that not it is easier to blame the educator whether the general education or special education teacher. General education teachers are trained in their content and special education teachers are trained in the education of special needs children, that is why it is so vital that these disciplines collaborate for inclusion to be successful.
Delete