Special Education

[Smber2c]

Having gotten a bit of info from a friend who is an elementary education major, I think my idea of Special Education was Mentally Retarded children.

She explained that Special Education has a variety of sub-groups:

Special Education (I’m sure I don’t know all the groups)

1. Behavior Impaired (ADD…I guess?)
2. Social/Emotionally Impaired
3. Speech Impaired (studder, etc…)
4. Otherwise Physically Impaired (wheel chair, blind, etc…)
5. Mentally Impaired (down syndrome, etc…)

So, looking at the above, I understand why the term ‘special needs’ is used, since each of these children would have some sort of extra way of needing help or tending.

Many of my contentions then are not in regard to Special Education, but instead are in relation to the “Mentally Impaired”.

However, I’ve enjoyed learning about all the Special Needs students, so please don’t fail to post your story or thoughts on any of the Special Education issues, I’m sure there is more to be learned.

 

[aboverubies]

I don’t care what terms are used

I do. And it has nothing to do with political correctness. The terms we use in regards to our son are: intellectually and physically disabled and developmentally delayed. We also use the terms ‘special needs’ and ‘special education’. I know the preferred terms have changed over time - these are the current ones - and I believe they carry the most dignity.

Our six year old son is in first grade in a special education class at an Australian public school. There are six children in the class whom have a variety of disabilities - all of whom are considered moderate to severe. Their disabilities include cerebral palsy, autism, downs syndrome and developmental delays.

The children divide their time between their own classroom and mixing with the mainstream children (my preferred term for the so-called “normal” kids. ) Shared activities include recess, assembly, library, art, school performances, excursions etc. For the rest of the time the mainstream and special ed children are in seperate classes enabling them to work at the level appropriate for them. In my opinion this is the best of both worlds and my husband and I are very happy with this set-up.

There are a few other physically disabled children who are in mainstream classes because intellectually they are on par or above their peer level.

When we first enrolled our son, we were a bit apprehensive about sending him to a mainstream school. Previously he was attending a dedicated special needs school, but we moved and his current school was our only option. However our fears were soon laid to rest as we spent time at the school and quietly noted how the children interacted with one another. Just a couple of weeks into the term my husband was dropping our son at school and a young girl ran past and called out “Hi William!” Our son is in a wheel chair and has never spoken a word in his life yet this little girl saw him simply as a class-mate. Another day I was making a lunch-time visit and learned that a limited number of mainstream children are allowed into the special ed classroom to play with the special needs children. I watched as numerous disappointed kids were turned away with a “Sorry we’re full today - try again tomorrow!” I can’t begin to explain how much hope and joy that gave me. I was holding back the tears watching all the children play together.

I believe that both the special needs and the mainstream children of this school are very blessed to be growing up with one another. This little country public school is an excellent model of how to do things right. But maybe I’m just biased.

 

[aboverubies]

A mystery and question I have is whether these students who are behind developmentally, with intensive education, could have a sort of forced mental development (though I don’t know if this is physically possible).

God bless,
Aaron Magnan

www.iahp.org

 

[vern_humphrey]

Hey vern humphrey, in reading your posts I can see that you have high expectations for all students and I think that’s great. But I’d request that we not try changing this thread into an analysis of the American education system in general, of %'s getting into college, or any of that.

The topic is Special Education. Really that’s why the 30% figure was misunderstood, because we’re talking about Special Education. So, if you could avoid stats or focusing on General Education and aviod any comments on college at all, I would greatly appreciate it.

The point is, the 30% graduation failure rate demonstrates the system is broken. If we can’t do the primary mission – educate normal children – how do we expect to educate children with special needs?

 

[Smber2c]

I believe that both the special needs and the mainstream children of this school are very blessed to be growing up with one another. This little country public school is an excellent model of how to do things right. But maybe I’m just biased.

Of course you are biased, ,so what, we all are to some degree. That school does sound like it is doing a wonderful job in serving all of it’s students, thanks for sharing.

 

[aaronjmagnan]

smber2c:

Sorry to take so long writing back.

Yeah, California is a wacky place. But in all of its lunacy, some things work pretty well.

But what you said is pretty much how it is out here…those who are really far behind will only be mainstreamed in the subjects that they can realistically “handle,” if, that is, there are any subjects that they can handle.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I do. And it has nothing to do with political correctness. The terms we use in regards to our son are: intellectually and physically disabled and developmentally delayed. We also use the terms ‘special needs’ and ‘special education’. I know the preferred terms have changed over time - these are the current ones - and I believe they carry the most dignity.

How does one term carry more dignity than another term which means the same thoing?

 

[aboverubies]

How does one term carry more dignity than another term which means the same thoing?

Words such as “retard” and “mongoloid” and “spastic” were once merely medical terms, used to describe medical conditions. Over time however, they have been used in the vernacular as terms of insult; particularly among children. As a consequence these terms now carry a negative, derisive tone.

Modern terms such as “special needs” do not carry these negative connotations as they have not been used commonly as insults. They are simply medical terms describing medical conditions. So “retarded” is now replaced with “intellectually disabled”; “mongoloid” is “Down’s Syndrome”; “spastic” is “cerebral palsy”. The terms are more dignified because they apptly describe the medical condition, free from the taint of mockery.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Words such as “retard” and “mongoloid” and “spastic” were once merely medical terms, used to describe medical conditions. Over time however, they have been used in the vernacular as terms of insult; particularly among children. As a consequence these terms now carry a negative, derisive tone.

In other words, they are Politically Incorrect not because of any inherent quality, but because of the conditions to which they refer.

Modern terms such as “special needs” do not carry these negative connotations as they have not been used commonly as insults.

Actually, they are being used with negative connotations – and in a few years they will be as Politically Incorrect as the terms they replaced.

They are simply medical terms describing medical conditions.

So were “retarded,” “mongoloid” and “spastic”

So “retarded” is now replaced with “intellectually disabled”; “mongoloid” is “Down’s Syndrome”; “spastic” is “cerebral palsy”. The terms are more dignified because they apptly describe the medical condition, free from the taint of mockery.

For a while. But only for a while.

 

[CCM08]

When I was in high school insults about lack of intelligence were as likely to make use of politically correct terms as the politically incorrect ones.

 

[vern_humphrey]

When I was in high school insults about lack of intelligence were as likely to make use of politically correct terms as the politically incorrect ones.

That’s because it’s the condition itself, not the word used to describe it, that that is the basis of the insult.

Changing the name does nothing to deal with the underlying prejudice against people with mental or physical handicaps.

 

[aboverubies]

In other words, they are Politically Incorrect not because of any inherent quality, but because of the conditions to which they refer.

Actually, they are being used with negative connotations – and in a few years they will be as Politically Incorrect as the terms they replaced.

So were “retarded,” “mongoloid” and “spastic”

For a while. But only for a while.

Again, whether a term is politically correct or not doesn’t concern me in the slightest, as the parent of a disabled child. I simply refuse to use a term that carries with it the connotation of an insult when referring to our dear son and his peers. They deserve better.

I’m not sure what you mean by “they are being used with negative connotations”…could you please explain this further? Do you mean that you’ve heard children using these modern terms as insults against one another? Or do you associate the term as being “negative” merely because it describes a disabilty?

I am yet to hear the modern terms being used as common insults. I agree that they could well aquire insult status over time…however I hold out hope that they will not. Not from any misplaced hope in an end to all prejudice; rather a tentative confidence that the words themselves lack the quality of an insult.

For a child wishing to hurt another, shouting “You’re a retard!” packs quite a punch. There is the insinuation that the other child is mentally deficient plus the word itself is short and sharp and can carry as much venom as one desires.

Replacing it with the current term just doesn’t have the same ring to it. Imagine, in the heat of an argument, screaming “yeah, well you’re intellectually disabled!” It is clumsy and overly long; many a school-yard bully would have trouble even pronouncing the words. I claim a similiar argument for the other terms such as “special needs” etc. They are too soft, too long, feather-weight words. There are plenty of punchier, nastier words in the insult basket to choose from. And that is why I hope the current terms will remain simply medical descriptions.:twocents:

 

[boppaid]

Again, whether a term is politically correct or not doesn’t concern me in the slightest, as the parent of a disabled child. I simply refuse to use a term that carries with it the connotation of an insult when referring to our dear son and his peers. They deserve better.

I’m not sure what you mean by “they are being used with negative connotations”…could you please explain this further? Do you mean that you’ve heard children using these modern terms as insults against one another? Or do you associate the term as being “negative” merely because it describes a disabilty?

I am yet to hear the modern terms being used as common insults. I agree that they could well aquire insult status over time…however I hold out hope that they will not. Not from any misplaced hope in an end to all prejudice; rather a tentative confidence that the words themselves lack the quality of an insult.

For a child wishing to hurt another, shouting “You’re a retard!” packs quite a punch. There is the insinuation that the other child is mentally deficient plus the word itself is short and sharp and can carry as much venom as one desires.

Replacing it with the current term just doesn’t have the same ring to it. Imagine, in the heat of an argument, screaming “yeah, well you’re intellectually disabled!” It is clumsy and overly long; many a school-yard bully would have trouble even pronouncing the words. I claim a similiar argument for the other terms such as “special needs” etc. They are too soft, too long, feather-weight words. There are plenty of punchier, nastier words in the insult basket to choose from. And that is why I hope the current terms will remain simply medical descriptions.:twocents:

Your posts are so thoughtful and insightful. Thank you for sharing your feelings, based on y our experience. I agree with you 100% about the weight of words, and how some carry more dignity. As Catholic Christians, we need to ensure that we treat every life with dignity. Calling people “retard” and other negative terms do no such thing. Thanks for reminding us why.

 

[aboverubies]

Your posts are so thoughtful and insightful. Thank you for sharing your feelings, based on y our experience. I agree with you 100% about the weight of words, and how some carry more dignity. As Catholic Christians, we need to ensure that we treat every life with dignity. Calling people “retard” and other negative terms do no such thing. Thanks for reminding us why.

Thankyou and you’re welcome.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Again, whether a term is politically correct or not doesn’t concern me in the slightest, as the parent of a disabled child. I simply refuse to use a term that carries with it the connotation of an insult when referring to our dear son and his peers. They deserve better.

I’m not sure what you mean by “they are being used with negative connotations”…could you please explain this further? Do you mean that you’ve heard children using these modern terms as insults against one another? Or do you associate the term as being “negative” merely because it describes a disabilty?

All of the above.

I am yet to hear the modern terms being used as common insults. I agree that they could well aquire insult status over time…however I hold out hope that they will not. Not from any misplaced hope in an end to all prejudice; rather a tentative confidence that the words themselves lack the quality of an insult.

I believe another poster also noted seeing words like “special needs” being used as an insult.

For a child wishing to hurt another, shouting “You’re a retard!” packs quite a punch. There is the insinuation that the other child is mentally deficient plus the word itself is short and sharp and can carry as much venom as one desires.

And so does “special needs” or any other term that replaces it.

Replacing it with the current term just doesn’t have the same ring to it. Imagine, in the heat of an argument, screaming “yeah, well you’re intellectually disabled!” It is clumsy and overly long; many a school-yard bully would have trouble even pronouncing the words. I claim a similiar argument for the other terms such as “special needs” etc. They are too soft, too long, feather-weight words. There are plenty of punchier, nastier words in the insult basket to choose from. And that is why I hope the current terms will remain simply medical descriptions.:twocents:

Riiiiight – it’s the words that are bad, not the kid who uses them, nor his intent.

 

[mommyof4]

Good points. It really depends on the child, which is why an EXCELLENT special ed program is necessary. If a proper IEP is done, the best situation for each individual child should be taken into account.

As a SPED teacher, I agree. There is no “one size fits all” in the world of special ed.

 

[KathleenElsie]

As a SPED teacher, I agree. There is no “one size fits all” in the world of special ed.

Thank you I was in the hopes that someone would say this. I trained as a School Psy and found that I could not agree with the way our system placed children.

Also most people do not understand that the special ed students funding go to gifted students also. My argument was that education funding should go only to the education of any child. All other services should come from social services paid for my the state not the local school taxes.