| It may work with physical handicaps, but I think it would be disaster with ADD.
People with ADD need minimal distraction and background noise to function
on a normal level. If they're talking about putting ADD kids in a class
with 25 other kids, they're clearly not going to get this. It might work
if the class size is small enough, but since the purpose seems to be to
cut costs, this is unlikely to happen.
|
| I also feel that this approach would work fine with physically
challenged students but could have some big drawbacks for the learning
disabled child. I cannot imagine one teacher and and aide trying to
find the balance of things to teach both types of students in the same
classroom. I would be very upset as a parent if I found my child was
not being taught the things a non-learning disabled child is expected
to learn during those elementary years because they had to slow down
for learning disabled children. It would be a great dis-service to both
types of students - one wouldn't learn what they could and one wouldn't
learn at all because the teaching was not tailored to their needs.
If the program is talking about having learning disabled and physically
challenged students in the same environent with the appropriate
teaching staff for each type of student, then fine. I would not want my
child held back so the pace could be slower for those who need it (I'm
also of the same philosophy with traditional classrooms - within reason).
The integration sounds wonderful on paper but I cannot imagine every
school suddenly making the switch. If 1 teacher could handle 20
(approx) non-disabled students and 1 teacher could handle
5 (approx) disabled children, and you now try to have 2 sets of 10
non-disabled and 3 disabled students with one teacher each, the value
of the education will have to go down or you have to higher more staff.
We cannot afford for the value of the American education to go down any
lower nor can many school systems afford more staff.
I would love to see my children in an educational environment where
they are exposed to disabilities. I think alot more headway has to be
made with that integration, but not at the expense of the education
that can and should be offered to ALL children. Just because a child is
learning disabled or physically challenged doesn't mean that they are
not still a child that likes to be with other children. I can see more
of a mainstreaming approach taken with this suggested program.
Just my opinion (for now)...
Andrea
|
| I never understood why anyone would consider segregating physically
challenged. Is it true? If a kid were in a wheelchair would they not
be mainstreamed? If that's true, why would that be? Is it because the
other kids would be jealous because that kid got out of phys ed class?
Certain things I wish they would mainstream.
My daughter's 4th grade class learned sign language. It would
have been ever so much more fun if they could have had an excuse to use it
regularly. (Likewise with any foreign language -- it would be nice to
have someone fluent in it to practice with.)
On the other hand, I also think it's important to segregate based on
skill levels in all subjects. I know my son, who was very behind on fine
motor skills felt overwhelmed with trying to keep up. Having him struggling on
the bottom of the class was terrible for his self esteem. And for a kid
ahead of the class in a subject, it is a disservice to them and the rest
of the kids to keep them in the class. If you want cooperative learning
where the more advanced kids help the less advanced, then fine. When the
more advanced kids aren't busy learning things on their own level, they
can act as tutors. I think it would be great for a kid that really struggled
to learn something to act as a tutor to someone else (maybe a younger
child). Great for his self
esteem. Great for really cementing the skills. But having something like
a math class where kids are all at different levels, and where presumably
the teacher aims somewhere in the middle seems crazy for anyone not in
the middle.
|