Phase 8

-Did you learn what you hoped to learn about the topic?

Yes, I discovered a lot about all the different angles on this topic and probably more about the issue than I even thought I would learn about.

-What were some of the benefits/drawbacks of focusing on a topic in phases?

It helped me to look at the topic from several viewpoints and it also helped to work on the research in blocks, so that each time I came back to work on a new phase, I could face it with a clear mind.

-Do you think you will approach the way you learn about the topics you are interested in differently after this assignment?

Well, I still have same initial opinion as before I started, but the dynamics of it have changed since my research. For instance, I firmly believed that special education students should at most times be geared towards inclusion in schools. It wasn't until after my research that I realized all of the negative factors of inclusion that teachers and schools are still dealing with, and how many programs need to be changed in how they carry out their definition of inclusion.

-Has this assignment made you more confident about your ability to discuss topics with others?

Yes. Although there is still a lot to learn about it, I do feel like I have noteworthy input on this issue that I did not have before (and which I can be confident in, since I know my information comes from credible sources).

-What is the most valuable thing you have learned about research after doing this assignment?

The most valuable part was learning how to summarize sources and then reflect on them. I have struggled in the past with trying to respond to articles but it is so much easier to do after I have already summarized the entire article. It helps me to pick apart the main points and conclusions without missing key details or misrepresenting the author's view.

Phase Seven

I found my article on the EBSCO database. The article is called "Inclusion of all students with emotional or behavioral disorders? Lets think again." It was found on the Academic Search Premier. It is from the Phi Delta Kappan periodical which is a professional organization for teachers. Two authors are listed, James M Kauffman, who has received his Ed.D. in special education from the University of Kansas, and John Wills Lloyd, who teaches and conducts research at the University of Virginia's Curry School of Education.

This article will be helpful for my research because so far I have agreed with inclusion, and this article moves into how inclusion can be modified and why we may need to broaden the definition of inclusion. It also adds an angle that slightly contrasts the last source I used, which warned against highly differentiation. This article warns us in making over generalizations and realizing the full extent of what inclusion will do to the regular classroom setting.

Summary:

The article begins by asserting the idea that there are many children in general education classrooms who may not be diagnosed as a special needs child but do indeed struggle with emotional and behavioral issues. The author is calling for us to face the fact that there will be problems and issues that we will have to work through if we decide to use inclusion. He is hesitant to assume that all of these students will be able to receive an appropriate education in the general classroom setting.

The article points that there are many children who are being taught in regular school systems who have handicaps but have not been diagnosed. They are often not diagnosed unless their behavior is fairly severe and it is very common for multiple problems to occur in the classroom before the children are diagnosed (the article gives two examples of children who were in a regular classroom and were not labeled as special needs students until they caused significant disruption to the flow of the classroom). Control over students with emotional or behavioral issues is said to be crucial for the instruction and academic progression of all students involved.

The article goes on to introduce different strategies that work well with handling these students and basic traits each program should posses, including monitoring progress and frequently coaching the students in applying the skills that they learn. It is confirmed that not every strategy is the same, and there are many factors that play into acquiring each student's education.

Students with emotional or behavioral disorders are not usually identified for special education, and the author suggests that many of these students are certainly competent to remain in the regular classroom but that more strategies should be implemented in order for them to succeed.

There are two major problems that the author asserts in reference to the inclusion of students with behavioral and emotional disorders. There are not enough trained personnel to support the students and the pupil/staff ratio is extremely low. The author insists that we need to realize inclusion is the correct program to abide by for these students and that it will be long, laborious task that will require a case-by-case approach.

Next the author proposes that the definition of inclusion be broadened to allow for students to have different placements based on what conditions are able to help the student feel secure and adept to learn.

The article is summed up by the idea that in our efforts to move forward with inclusion for an achievable amount of students, we need to face the realities of teaching a classroom full of disabled/non disabled students, and we should not allow over generalizations to steer our thinking.

Reflect:

Although I believe that schools should use inclusion, this article helped me to consider all of the dynamics of inclusion and why we need to be cautious allowing children with behavioral and emotional disabilities in the classroom.

I am sure that there are many children in the regular classrooms who struggle emotionally/behaviorally but are not "labeled" as such and it becomes an issue if the child is not diagnosed before much disruption is caused. However, we need not differentiate these children into separate groups right away but work on establishing them into the main classroom, using various methods for each individual. We need to keep in mind that the focus is on the student, not the disability.

A friend of mine who teaches second grade, told me once that when she has a child with emotional or behavioral disabilities in the classroom, it is very tricky to keep that student on track without "dumming down" the material for the rest of the class. I understand this concern and I would agree when the author of my source claims that there is not enough personnel or teacher/student ratio to keep up the pace of the classroom. The question I must ask in response: is it ever possible to get "enough" faculty to keep the perfect balance of the classroom? There are many schools who would agree that they could use more professionals to help out with these students, but can they necessarily afford it? Will that contribute to the general education teachers getting cuts? I would agree with those who allow some para-professionals to come into the classroom and work one-on-one with the disabled child to keep them moving along while the teacher is able to give attention to the class as a whole. Two elementary school teachers that I know of seem to be pleased with this setting and although it might not be the perfect option for every situation, it still gives relief for the teacher without having to hire countless special education professionals.

In conclusion, I would have to agree when the article affirms the idea that inclusion is a long process and requires a case-by-case approach. It is a fact that cannot be avoided. I wonder if my cousin Joey ever had someone sit down with him and his family to help to develop a unique plan that would fit his specific needs. Instead of using a "one size fits all" deal, or pointing him to the "autistic students group," using an inclusion-based approach with strategies that best fit Joey's needs, seems to be a healthy solution. Inclusion can be a wonderful and highly beneficial program, if adequate procedures are used and unique strategies are implemented for the care and comfort of each student involved.

Phase 6

I found my article on the EBSCO database. The article is called "Rethinking Inclusion: Schoolwide Applications" It was found on the Academic Search Premier. Two authors are listed and there are several references at the bottom of the article. It is a periodical from the Phi Delta Kappa International which has had many other issues and seems to be trustworthy.

This article helps me to point out the problems that arise when students are learning in an exclusive "special education" setting. It will be good to delve into the issue of what setting is most beneficial to the student with disabilities: a specialized or integrated setting?

Summary:
The author of the article begins by asserting the idea that "integration" and "differentiation" are completely paradoxical as we try to offer special needs programs for our children. He says that we are trying to achieve differentiation in schools in order to help students become equipped but as we add more and more "programs" for different needs we do it at all at the cost of integration. He suggests that we are causing increasing division as we add more categories and "subcategories" for different needs of the students. The author explains that before the 1970's, medical doctors treated disabilities as a health problem. Then as Psychology grew and became more specific in their diagnostics, students were labeled and placed in highly differentiated groups. Then in the 1980s, The U.S. Department of Education tried to slow down the process of differentiating the special need groups and they encouraged the practice of inclusion by funding training and research. The author claims that this has somewhat failed, as complaints came within special education, and those in the general education program were not thrilled either. The author mentions the No Child Left Behind legislation as helpful in moving forward with integration. The reason being that they include all students as general education students and they tend to suggest to students more often than not that integration will be more helpful to the student than segregation. According to the article, how inclusion is defined plays a key role in getting support from the general education arena. There are concerns that general education teachers have for including special needs children in the classroom, such as not letting them fall behind while still maintaining the pace of the classroom. Some schools use paraprofessions to sit in the back of the classroom and use a one-on-one method to work separately with the student. The author highly discourages this as it seems to add more division and goes on to to introduce a new idea of teaching special education. How can we teach special education students without excluding them from the rest of their peers but at the same maintain efficiency in the schools? The Schoolwide Applications Model (SAM), is introduced and described as a method that introduces the idea of using techniques that special education teachers use and implementing them in the entire curriculum. As the author goes into more detail on what SAM is, he explains that is is helpful because it keeps all the children fully included and joined together and it not only assists the disabled children but the other students benefit from learning the same techniques.

Response:

I think that the author is correct when he says that differentiating children into so many separate categories causes problems and does not benefit the students in the long run. First of all, when children are placed in classes with others who are "specifically" just like them, although they are guided with professionals in that field, major problems arise. My autistic cousin, Joey, was placed in several different kinds of learning institutions, including schools specifically for autistic children. Joey learned that things he struggled with, other kids did too. The problem was, some kids had it even worse and Joey struggled with not being influenced by these kids and some of the bad habits they adopted. Yes, he was surrounded by people who knew tons of information about autism and who had special "autistic" certifications and were paid to help Joey and his family deal with his problems. But Joey was thrown in an atmosphere where some of the problems he struggled with (i.e. anger), took center stage at the school because his friends struggled with the same thing. Not only was Joey being subtly influenced to keep up his bad habits, but he was introduced to even bigger ones. While at home, Joey was addicted to picking up paper clips and storing interesting "junk" in drawers, at school he was introduced to storing drugs. Granted, children can be encouraged to misbehave in any kind of setting, but I would argue that putting a child in a setting where everyone is struggling with the same kind of problems can be worse.
Which leads me to another reason why I think differentiating can pose a problem. My aunt and uncle looked at so many options for Joey. They talked to "experts" in the field of autism, they worked with multiple teachers and went in and out of various schools. They were so focused on the fact that Joey had autism and they needed to help him deal with his problem. There are so many "experts" out there who focus too much on the problem and how to treat it, than focusing on the ultimate goal for any child. The goal for most students is become equipped to face the world, help others struggling and adapt to what our culture terms "successful." If a child is living in a "specialized world" throughout his school years, how will he adjust to his first job and immediately begins working with people who are different than himself? How will he react to everyone treating him just like the next person, and not special because of his disability? On the other hand, if the student is put in a classroom with his peers, some who do not struggle with disability, he will, with some guiding, be able to adjust as best he can to the real world. I believe that for the most part, highly differentiating children in schools can pose many problems and fail to achieve the goal of integration which children can reach in an inclusion setting in school.

Phase 5

I found my article on www.4children.org. The article is called "Special Needs, "mainstream" Classroom" and it is written by Kathy Flores. Here is the link: http://www.4children.org/issues/2003/january_february/special_needs_mainstream_classroom/

This article is credible because: It is associated with an organization called the "Action Alliance for Children." This organization has a board of directors who are from different universities with various ways to contact them. An author is provided and there are resources at the end of the article.

I think this article is helpful for my research because it lists clear reasons for advocating for mainstreaming and it gives examples of children who are benefiting from it.

Reflect:

In the beginning of the article, the author talks about a girl who has had the opportunity to be in regular grade level classes which her mother worked hard for her to be in. I like how the author personalizes the issue by allowing us to experience the success of a girl with a serious disability who was mainstreamed.

The author explains that this can happen if different ways. She talks about a boy who was able to sit in his classes with a teachers aide, another boy who simply took one class at a grade-level school,and a deaf child who took half of his classes in a mainstreamed setting with an interpreter. The author realizes that not every child is to be mainstreamed the same way. Although the form of mainstreaming may be adjusted for each student and depending on his or her level of disability, there should still be an opportunity for each child to interact with other students, disabled or not.

I like how the article points out specific benefits of mainstreaming. It not only talks about how it can help students with special needs but also the other kids. It gives them a better understanding of them and what other people go through. It also forces the teacher to be more creative in her instructing techniques.

I think the article is trying to convey that there are many different ways of mainstreaming kids. Sometimes there are problems and issues that they must work through but the benefits are numerous and worth it. All children should have a chance to interact with the rest of the children in their grade, even if it takes some creativity on the teachers part and a little adjusting of how much the child is able to handle. The author adds that we just need the right leadership, trained staff, and curriculum. I agree that with the write resources and leaders, mainstreaming should be made available to special needs kids all over.

Phase Four

Special Education

There does not seem to be an author listed, but the page is from "Facts on File," on the Issues and Controversies page from the Lancaster Bible College library.

Why this website is credible: It is on a database which is supported by the LBC library. The author's name is provided, along with citations and a bibliography.

Reflect: I think that this is a great article for my topic. It provides me with a good base, by giving background information on the issue and its history. It is a big help because it shares pros and cons of both sides of the argument and provides plenty of statistics and percentages for my research.

Summary:

The article starts off by giving a background knowledge of the argument, giving a quick look at the two different ways to approach the issue. The author talks about how in 1975 a special education system was put in place (called IDEA) and how it brought more special needs children into the mainstream school system, which was a shift from the prior trend of separating the special needs kids from the rest. IDEA created a way for parents and teachers to work together so that they could form the best "least restrictive environment" method for their child. The article goes on to state that there are many public-schooled student in the US who are in enrolled in special education and a lot of government funding goes into these programs. It moves on to verify the pros of mainstreaming special needs children. He argue's that both the non-disabled and the disabled will be able to learn and be influenced by each other, and will gain understanding in the present and also for later on in life. He believes that mainstreaming will help to better train the teachers and it is simply the right of the student to have the option of being placed in school with everyone else. After asserting the benefits of mainstreaming, the author moves into the concerns being raised on this issue. Many think that it is simply illogical. Special needs students have too many needs that they just cannot possibly be met in a "normal" classroom setting. Mainstreaming can also bring a lot more tension into the lives of the all the students. The author concludes by emphasizing the growing trend of mainstreaming, and although there are some legitimate questions and concerned being raised, mainstreaming seems to offer the "least restrictive environment" for students across the board.

My Topic

My topic is based on this question: Should children who have special needs be mainstreamed educationally or can this be problematic for them or other students and teachers?

This is something that I would like to know more about, because I have had conflicting thoughts and opinions about it.My aunt has struggled with this issue, as she has pulled her son that has autism in and out of a handful of schools, some mainstreamed some specialized. I would like to study all of the different factors that play into this issue, and how many people look at it and why. It will be interesting to see the different views and opinions that people have on this issue.

What do I already know about this topic? I know certain people who struggled with this issue but I have never researched it and dove into all the arguments that are involved.

What do I hope to learn about this topic? I would like to know about the concerns that go into mainstreaming special needs kids. Why do people feel like they need to separate special needs kids from the rest of the "normal" students?

Who is the ideal audience? Mostly for people who are open to hearing both sides of the argument and would like to know the main advantages and concerns to mainstreaming special needs kids.