Rena
Recently I have been struggling with seeing my young students go down the hall for their specially designed instruction. I am not convinced that this is the least restrictive and most appropriate environment. Most educators work diligently at building a community of learners. Then at some point in the day some students are sent the message, that they aren't quite good enough to remain in the community, and go elsewhere for learning.
Historically, special education students have utilized an alternate curriculum and were frequently exempt from standardized tests. If they participated in the standardized tests, their schools and districts were not held accountable for the test results. Consequently, many special education teachers focused on the student's Individualized Education Program's goals and objectives, to the exclusion of the general education curriculum. This continued to be a common practice even after the 1997 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act reauthorization mandated the inclusion of special education students in each state's curriculum standards and assessments.
However, with the No Child Left Behind Act's mandate to include students with disabilities in each state's accountability system, public schools and teachers are partially judged by how well special education students are learning these standards. So how can we educators best provide special education students meaningful access to the general education curriculum?
Is it possible to look more closely at Special Education Services? My district has kept the same system for the past 15 years. I have heard from many teachers that it is an enormous task to teach a class of 25 plus students that demonstrate grade level knowledge. To have students sitting and continually struggling may not be the best model, but couldn't personnel be included within the general ed classroom to assist the students using the vocabulary that the general ed teacher is using? I have also been informed that specially designed instruction may be delivered within the gen ed classroom. Since now our para-educators need to be qualified, it seems they could be quite effective within the gen ed room.
Since teaching and learning of the general education curriculum takes place in the classroom it seems that is where the students need to be as well. If they are expected to take the tests, they should be afforded the opportunity to learn, given time to practice and then their knowledge be measured properly.
I don't want to over simplify the situation and realize that each student's needs must be considered, I would just like to learn of some models that allow students to remain in the community.
You open a great topic, Rena. Here’s what I did in classes with 35-36 diverse students in a regular 5th grade, including students with autism, several with behavior disorders (some said they had emotional problems), gifted-talented students, at least one had developmental delays, …
First, I dropped consideration of “disabilities.” Instead, I emphasized learning process, not “teaching.” My mental mantra wss “get out of their way, so they can learn.”
This takes no special training or background beyond reviewing how you learn and adapting it your classroom and school. (Yes, formalized systems exist for those who want to use them.) My classes were usually noisy and sometimes other teachers and parents complained about it.
I set up a system of individualized learning for all 35+ students. I started Monday classes by writing the weekly lesson plans on the board. Students copied these plans for their own use. (Copied, no handouts.)
I also told them that I knew they all knew what to do, when to do it, etc.
They all worked from this common schedule, simple rules, and common texts (even the non-readers). I allowed (I don’t like that descriptor)them to work in self-assigned groups. I offered prompts and showed individuals and sometimes the class how to complete individual tasks, and conducted conventional weekly tests and surprise quizzes to monitor progress.
They all completed all expected work and half scored on standardized tests at least above expectations for the first semester of sixth grade.
And, we all had a great time in the classroom!
I hope this description offers you support to go-your-own-way to give priority to learning. It’s a different vocabulary and logic from “teaching.”
A lot of times people call for the need for paraeducator support. A good paraeducator is priceless, but it is unfair to that professional to put them in a position, working with students who might have exceptional needs, without paying to train him/her in instructional strategies or different approaches to help those students. Some districts provide paras with “professional development” monies (as some do for teachers as well) so that the para can use that money for trainings or further education to develop in their role.
Also important is a system of job assignment which keeps good special education paras where they can continue practicing their expertise. In our district, classified staff do not know from year to year what their job will be…one year they may be a paraeducator, the next year they might be manning the detention room.
Last, teachers also need specific training about how to best serve mainstreamed special education students so that those students aren’t simply “staying,” they are being served. It is tough, yes, to differentiate and adjust instruction, but sometimes we teachers are not as well versed in how to do this as we could be. (Add that to our endless to-do list.) If districts are committed to supporting special education, they’ll make possible individual training (not meaningless en masse guest speakers who talk at us, but real, intimate, in context and immediately relevant trainings). The first time I had an Autistic student in my mainstream class, I had no idea how to best serve him, or frankly, how to productively interact with him. In the end, I spend a lot of my own time educating myself and partnering with his case manager to make myself a better teacher for him.