http://www.edweek.org/rc/articles/2008/10/27/special_education_in_america.html,
accessed 12/1/08
Question from Kathleen Kosobud, Doctoral Candidate, Michigan State University (and President, LDA of Michigan):
With the increased focus on inclusive practice, many parent groups fear that "individualized" education will no longer be realized for children with "high incidence" or "mild" disabilities. What would you say to those who are concerned about "preserving the full continuum"?
The fear of decreased individualization is common, but unfounded. As with good inclusive practices we keep students with mild disabilities and their needs as central to planning. We cannot forget that removing students from the learning environment does not equal needs being met.
We have years of experience and research to show us this. The trick is to differentiate and plan for students needs upfront. One real example of this is when I am doing a presentation with teachers, I ask a few of them to go to the back of the room to get some remedial help on differentiating curriculum. The very act of standing up and leaving to learn in an area that is difficult for them causes them to feel anxious, and stigmatized. They feel very unprepared to learn in the new environment. Yet, this is what we ask our struggling learners to do everyday.
Another way to look at the continuum is not about spaces (4 walls) instead it is about intensity of services. And the law demonstrates that if services are portable, they should be brought to the child (emphasis added).
- Nancy Reder is director of Government Affairs for the National Association of State Directors of Special Education, an organization working with states to improve outcomes for students with disabilities.
- George Theoharis, a former teacher and principal, is a professor in the Department of Teaching and Leadership at Syracuse University, where he studies classroom inclusion practices and other special education issues.
