Criminal Waste of Resources
by
Linda
Schrock Taylor
by Linda Schrock Taylor
Full inclusion
is a philosophical movement based upon the notion that all students,
regardless of the level or type of disability, should be educated
entirely in the same general education classrooms as their same-age
peers. Advocates of a policy of full inclusion feel that special
education classrooms constitute a form of segregation and that
separate classrooms for special education students, like classrooms
segregated by race, are inherently unequal.
~
Donald B. Crawford,
Ph.D.
For special
education students who have been unnecessarily penned in self-contained
classrooms, or in rooms which, in special ed vernacular, are referred
to as cross-categorical dumps, with exposure to general education
population and instruction kept to a bare minimum, full inclusion
might be an improvement in the children's educational plans.
However, for
special education students receiving services from teachers who
believe, as I do, that these children should only be in the resource
or categorical rooms for specific instruction provided with expertise
– remediation of speech; reading; math; language; living skills;
and for those students who have already been mainstreamed with acceptance,
and success in all offerings except the above; the policy of full
inclusion serves to cheat remedial students out of the direct, disability-specific
instruction they so greatly need in order to progress out of special
education and leave
all labels behind.
For the thousands
of skilled, well-trained, experienced, committed teachers of special
education, full inclusion serves as a death blow to their careers;
the end of their opportunities to do what they love and do best
– lesson delivery. Skilled, committed teachers want to teach, and
our students want, and need for us to teach! But, because our teacher
training schools recommended us for teaching certificates with the
general designation of "special education teacher," we are now considered,
by NCLB, to be unqualified to teach academic subjects: math;
English; reading; social studies, and so on through the course offerings.
Full inclusion
now offers thousands of opportunities for this nation to criminally
waste the potential and resources of its citizens – of the special
education teachers, and of the special education students who need,
but will not receive, those special
services that were hard-won by parents and advocates over the
past fifty and more years.
I wonder who
the writers of the No Child Left Behind law think has been
teaching these special students during all of the preceding decades?
The classroom aides? Maybe, hidden deeply within the law, one might
even find a clause stating that school aides are highly qualified
based on their existing job description – Instructional Aide,
but that special education teachers are not highly
qualified because of their generalist job label. It would not
surprise me since the lack of logic has become just that asinine;
the real and potential repercussions just that likely.
Do not get
me wrong. Special education teachers will still have jobs.
We are repeatedly reminded of that, and attempts are made to further
comfort us with assurances that "The schools will even need more
special educators!" The mis-organizers; the mis-educators; shallowly
believe that money is the only thing we value; the only thing that
keeps us working with our students. Yes, special education teachers
will still have jobs; they just will not have careers. They
will still be referred to as special education teachers –
even as their roles are denigrated, downplayed, and at times, even
despised.
However, rhetoric
aside, we special education teachers are being expected to plan
and support our own denigration; expected to assume our roles as
second class citizens; as glorified teacher aides; with good grace.
Any objections that we make are viewed; assessed; to be proof positive
that we are anti-child; anti-change; anti-progress. Repeatedly we
have thrown in our faces, "You are against full inclusion!"
In response, we just want to say…
"No, we are
not against full inclusion – if it is done legally, intelligently,
and…not with us! We chose careers that were to involve teaching.
We paid thousands of dollars for training to prepare us to teach.
We want to teach! We_want_to_teach!! We do not want
to become shadows in the background of a general education teacher's
classroom!
Additionally,
not only do we want to teach, our special students need
for us to teach. We need to teach, and our students need us to teach
in our own rooms, away from the curious eyes of non-disabled peers.
We need to
teach, and our students need us to teach, in our own rooms, near
our own special instructional materials, where we can doodle or
use sign language or show pictures or act theatrical – all as needed
in order to help deaf students learn new vocabulary and new concepts;
develop better and more mature receptive and expressive language
skills; learn to speak with speech that will be understood by the
people in their lives.
We need to
teach, and our students need us to teach, in our own rooms, where
we can elevate our voices to better garner attention and focus from
the massive numbers of Teaching-Disabled, and the few true Learning-Disabled
children so we can remediate delayed skills; close academic gaps;
help our students return permanently and honestly to general
education settings.
We need to
teach, and our students need us to teach, in our own rooms, near
our own special teaching materials, where we can instruct blind
children in Braille, mobility, and life skills.
We need to
teach, and our students need us to teach, in our own rooms where
we can modify materials, methods and appropriate reinforcements
to help mentally retarded children develop skills detailed by individually
chosen goals at Individual Educational Planning meetings as per
the legal requirements in the federal legislation, IDEA.
It is sheer
insanity to believe that most special services can
be taken to the special children in the general education
classrooms. In order for children to learn, they must be able to
focus; comprehend; then hook new information onto existing knowledge.
Learners must develop mental parameters in which to acquire new
information, and a functioning storage system in which to retain
it; from which to draw it for later usage. I cannot, and will not,
attempt to teach and remediate in an auditorily cluttered, distracting
environment. I need to be able to focus on my instruction, and so
do my students!
Picture, if
you will, a speech clinician trying to work with a hard of hearing
student within the regular classroom. No rational person can possibly
believe that the child will even be able to hear /k/, /s/, or /ng/,
let alone to hear and benefit from the instruction on how to shape
the mouth; place the tongue in relation to the teeth and throat;
then accurately produce sounds.
A rational
person could not possibly expect a hearing impaired child to accomplish
the near-impossible while the general education teacher gives academic
instruction in a voice loud enough to carry across a classroom;
talk above the noise level as children respond to questions, and
rustle papers, and hand in work, and move fannies in their seats
and talk out-of-turn, …all while interruptions – announcements,
children, parents, other teachers, and other special education teachers
providing special instruction for other special needs students,
enter and leave the classroom.
Call it Chaos.
Call it Dumbing Down. Call it anything except an effective
educational environment.
Shall the speech
clinician or the teacher of the hearing impaired put everyone in
the classroom on strict instructions to stay absolutely silent while
the individual lesson is taught to that special needs child so that
the child can actually hear and benefit from the teaching?
Parents of
general ed children could not possibly want their children to spend
their days sitting silently, unengaged, waiting… waiting… waiting
while instructional time is lost as one or another special educator
provides one or more special ed children with such services. How
can parents of special children possibly see any value in forcing
the children of other families to lose educational opportunities
just so their own special needs children can be seated in general
education classes for full inclusion, whether they are intellectually
and academically prepared to gain from such placement, or not? Will
such placements make their child less handicapped? No. Both sets
of children get cheated, no if's, and's, or publicity-to-the-contrary
about it.
I recently
attended an inservice presented by two very caring and involved
teachers who team-teach in a public school setting. Constantly
they reminded us that equality and parity between
the teachers are of utmost importance if full inclusion is to work
effectively. During the course of all these reminders, it became
clear that parity does not even exist between those
two teachers, and would rarely develop between other general/special
ed combinations, either.
The general
ed teacher was very definitely the lead person in the team, so much
so that late in the afternoon, when the special ed teacher happened
to remind us, "My name is…," I turned to a co-worker and whispered,
"Oh, I thought the name was 'her'." All day the general ed
teacher had referred to the special ed teacher her role
is; I let her do this little bit of class each day; I have
her write on the board as I teach; her students are
placed in the class to be exposed to algebra even though
we can't expect them to actually understand and do algebra.
When someone
asked if the special education teacher teaches any of the math classes,
the reaction of the general education teacher was immediate, genuine
and…telling. It might have been the response of any one of
thousands of displaced special education teachers, as well,
"No! I
want to do the teaching!! I don't want to give up the fun part of
my job! I went to school to be a teacher and I want to teach!!"
My point; my
feelings, … exactly!
I have been
teaching since 1972. I have spent the decades since then improving
my skills, education, training and experience. When all of the resources
that I can offer to special children are no longer welcomed for
use in the schools, then it is, indeed, time for me to leave the
teaching profession. It will be a loss for the children who will
not…learn to read; learn math; learn language; develop self-confidence;
escape from special education, under my tutelage. The same will
be true for thousands and thousands of the students of committed
special education teachers across the land.
The loss of
potential will amount to criminal theft from every special needs
student who might have had a special education teacher who, like
me, loves to teach, and who teaches with the goal of freeing the
child from the bondage
of special ed labels. The rejection of my skills will amount
to criminal theft from me, as well.
Full inclusion
will insure that too many special needs children remain bound to
labels, intellectually and academically shortchanged, for the remainder
of their lives.
Go ahead…let
those children experience social placements
while they waste precious learning time away from learning
placements. See what comes of this new fad as the pendulum of progressive
education swings wildly; as it continues to batter and destroy lives
in its erratic path.
Shame on all
the administrators, teachers and parents who purposely harm the
educational opportunities of all children – but especially devastate
the lives of those special children so in need of skilled, committed
special instruction – by forcing politically-motivated hindrances
into the classrooms of America.
January
9, 2006
Linda
Schrock Taylor [send
her mail] is an educational
consultant, homeschooling mom, and public school special ed teacher.
She is available for presentations, inservices, and workshops.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Linda
Schrock Taylor Archives
|