Pages

Sunday, October 2, 2016

Blog Post #3: Andrea Barber

            There are many arguments for and against inclusion in our school and society.   A common criticism of special education deals with “labeling effects” on the students with disabilities.  Inclusion standard-bearers say that labeling a student as “special” lowers expectations and self-esteem (Will, 1986).  On the other hand, “pull out” programs “has left many students feeling that they don’t belong in general education classrooms or the special education classrooms” (National Association of School Board of Education,1992).  Another argument for inclusion is that “there is now substantial evidence that most, if not all, children with disabilities, including children with very severe disabilities, can be educated appropriately without being isolation from peers who do not have disabilities” (Ringer & Kerr, 1988, p.6).        
            The Council of Exceptional Children believes that all children, youth, and young adults with disabilities are entitled to a free and appropriate education and/or services that lead to an adult life characterized by satisfying relations with others, independent living, productive engagement in the community, and participation in society at large (CEC’s Policy Statement, 1994).
            From my experience so far in the school system and from inclusive research  focusing on teacher perceptions of inclusion education meeting the needs of students with disabilities, the results I read are accurate.  Majority of the teachers are in favor of the concept of inclusion but not always practicing inclusive schooling.  Most teachers feel they don’t have time, adequate training, or expertise to meet the needs of  exceptional learners (Baker & Zigmond, 1990).
             There are many positive results from inclusion.  As stated in the mandate for a least restrictive environment, the intent of this provision is to ensure that special education is not a place where students go but instead is a service provided to guarantee equal access to education.  Federal regulations require that students with disabilities be educated with their nondisabled peers to the maximum extent possible (Jimenez & Graf). 
            In my opinion, working in a special education program as an educational aid, I can see both sides of the spectrum.  We have some students who come into our resource room most of the day except for specials (music, gym, lunch, art, recess) and we also have some students who stay in inclusion the majority of the day.  I feel it depends on the severity of the students’ disability as to being inclusive the majority of the school day, or to be in the resource room to benefit their educational needs.  Students are pulled for speech, OT, PT, etc throughout the day depending on their IEP needs.   As a parent I feel that I  would want my child to be included in as much as possible, if not all, in a general education setting. Inclusion in schools gives the students with disabilities normalization, and it eliminates the divide between special education and general education.      

3 comments:

  1. Andrea, I agree with you in that there are so many pros and cons for an inclusive classroom. Arguments provide criticism against labeling, self-esteem, pull-out programs and isolation. These are the unfortunate results that factor into inclusion, but in a perfect world, we can all hope they dissolve over time. In my experience, inclusion is being promoted to the best of administration’s ability, but as you implied, implementation can be questioned. As educators are pressured to meet the needs of exceptional learners without sufficient training, the students ultimately fall short of an inclusive experience. With much negativity surrounding inclusion, there can be growth and positivity as well. Well-trained special education teachers do exist and general education teachers with inclusion training are out there and they provide a great service to exceptional learners. These teachers collaborate with parents and among staff to benefit the students. These are the students that are able to grow socially and academically without isolation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is important to mention that in a society of ever-changing socio-economics, domestic dynamics, and emotional tribulations, the concept of normalization deserves further emphasis. It is not uncommon for a student to find the only example of structure within the walls of their classrooms. Consequently, it is essential to expose the exceptional to normality whenever possible.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I do agree that inclusion must depend on the severity of a student's disability. If inclusion is not beneficial to the student's education or takes away from other learners, then inclusion may not be the best route for them, but when possible and when appropriate, as much inclusion as possible is the goal. It all comes down to what the parents, teachers, and administrators deems as appropriate.

    ReplyDelete