Take a look at any school and you will find a required amount of community service that all students must complete if they wish to graduate. I think that it is a fantastic thing that we have instituted this requirement. Having done this, we have succeeded in finding a way to get our students to involve themselves in their communities and to give back to them. But what about after they have completed this requirement? What is being done to influence our students to continue volunteering and giving back to others after they have graduated?
That is my biggest issue with the mandatory community service: how do we ensure that we have motivated pupils enough to continue giving back after they have completed what we say they must? I feel like it is the same as when we tell students that they must complete a certain number of semesters of a certain subject. After they have reached that point, how do we keep them interested in the topic? Greater action must be taken to make sure that children in our schools do not view giving back to the community as just another required course. They should be learning what it means to volunteer and how much it means to the rest of the community.
We should not be making our students volunteer. Rather we should be enlightening them as to why it is so important to give back and help to improve the environments in which we each live. If we can show them the value of these things, we will be setting down the right path to provide students with the tools necessary to want to pursue a life of giving back and helping others.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Who do we want to be?
Here is my question for the educational institutions of this country: Why are you not accepting anyone? What is it about this current class of high-school seniors that you dislike so much? You can only use the "this is the largest pool of applicants ever" excuse so many times.
I can understand the fact that there are only so many spots available at any given institution, but why does its seem that there are none open at any university in the country? There are hundreds of applicants to each school every single year, but fewer and fewer kids are being admitted for the 2010-2011 year. Universities all have a very distinct build, one that has been constructed over a period of decades and is defined by the type of student that attends the establishment. But what happens when schools begin to turn away the very type of student that defines the institution? It it still the same school or has it become something different?
I firmly believe that this completely changes the university. I can sympathize with the fact that there is a need for there to be a drop in the number of admitted students, but do not turn away the kind of student that makes your institution what it has become. That is just not right. That is going against the fundamental foundation of what your institution has come to be, and therefore is not something that should be practiced.
So I will say it one more time: If you have to turn away students, you have to do it. But do not turn away a student that is exactly what your university has come to look for in its students. Because if you do this, what is the purpose of separate universities with distinct identities?
I can understand the fact that there are only so many spots available at any given institution, but why does its seem that there are none open at any university in the country? There are hundreds of applicants to each school every single year, but fewer and fewer kids are being admitted for the 2010-2011 year. Universities all have a very distinct build, one that has been constructed over a period of decades and is defined by the type of student that attends the establishment. But what happens when schools begin to turn away the very type of student that defines the institution? It it still the same school or has it become something different?
I firmly believe that this completely changes the university. I can sympathize with the fact that there is a need for there to be a drop in the number of admitted students, but do not turn away the kind of student that makes your institution what it has become. That is just not right. That is going against the fundamental foundation of what your institution has come to be, and therefore is not something that should be practiced.
So I will say it one more time: If you have to turn away students, you have to do it. But do not turn away a student that is exactly what your university has come to look for in its students. Because if you do this, what is the purpose of separate universities with distinct identities?
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Learn to Manage Your Resources!
Why is it that governing bodies tend to have a knack for mismanaging the resources that they allocate to their members? Sure staying in the technology race is important, but in no way is it worth setting aside resources for this progression when it is not possible to maintain the people necessary to use these assets.
Those of us from the Los Angeles area are aware that Los Angeles Unified School District most definitely has its issues. But this is not to say that they cannot be remedied. Quite the contrary actually; it is most definitely a possibility to fix, not all, but a lot of these problems. So here is my charge to you LAUSD: stop mismanaging your resources, and put your capital where it is needed.
Ok, so the economy is not in good shape, but that is not a reason to cut staff and deprive children of the education that they deserve. Why is the money that goes towards keeping teachers and other staff around instead going towards the purchase of Smart Boards? These resources should not be allocated towards such technological advancement, but rather for maintaining the people necessary to keep schools up and running.
Teachers and other faculty members are not often given the indispensable support that they need from LAUSD, causing them to put in not only the work that they are supposed to be, but also some of what the governing body should be completing. Because of this, some schools, such as the previously mentioned Carthay Center Elementary, are put into such dire positions that staff are not able to have a weekend. Instead of getting to stay at home with their families and have a relaxing two days, their weekends are often spent at school, taking care of things they cannot accomplish during the week because their governing body, LAUSD, has not allocated the proper resources.
It hardly seems fair that we are putting this kind of tax on our city’s educators. They are doing their jobs and not getting paid for it, rather they are donating their efforts. This is being done because it is what is necessary to ensure that the students of the school are able to continue receiving the high caliber education that they had become familiar with.
Now that I have brought up the issue, what can be done to remedy such ridiculous situations? One option, as previously suggested, is to do a better job of allocating resources. LAUSD should not be throwing money at products such as the Smart Board when its member schools can barely maintain a staff of 50 people.
A second possibility, which is a very hot-button issue during such difficult economic times, is to raise taxes. Yes, everybody is strapped when it comes to paying their taxes, but why not throw a little bit more money towards the government? This tax would be specifically for educational purposes and would be funneled back down to LAUSD. Providing the school system with more capital, unfortunately does not mean that it will be allocated properly, and go towards what is truly needed. It would be a necessity to put into place some kind of system that would ensure that this new source of money would go into paying the salaries of the most essential aspect of our schools. The technology is not what must be ensured. Rather, it is the maintenance of the faculty that use such resources that have futures that are in jeopardy.
My question is the following: will the Smart Boards teach our students? Will the computers? The answer is a very simple one: NO! It is a necessity of the education system to have teachers providing students with a vital learning experience. So once again, LAUSD please pay heed to my call. Please stop mismanaging your resources and funnel enough capital to your member schools to really be able to provide the necessary resources, our teachers.
Those of us from the Los Angeles area are aware that Los Angeles Unified School District most definitely has its issues. But this is not to say that they cannot be remedied. Quite the contrary actually; it is most definitely a possibility to fix, not all, but a lot of these problems. So here is my charge to you LAUSD: stop mismanaging your resources, and put your capital where it is needed.
Ok, so the economy is not in good shape, but that is not a reason to cut staff and deprive children of the education that they deserve. Why is the money that goes towards keeping teachers and other staff around instead going towards the purchase of Smart Boards? These resources should not be allocated towards such technological advancement, but rather for maintaining the people necessary to keep schools up and running.
Teachers and other faculty members are not often given the indispensable support that they need from LAUSD, causing them to put in not only the work that they are supposed to be, but also some of what the governing body should be completing. Because of this, some schools, such as the previously mentioned Carthay Center Elementary, are put into such dire positions that staff are not able to have a weekend. Instead of getting to stay at home with their families and have a relaxing two days, their weekends are often spent at school, taking care of things they cannot accomplish during the week because their governing body, LAUSD, has not allocated the proper resources.
It hardly seems fair that we are putting this kind of tax on our city’s educators. They are doing their jobs and not getting paid for it, rather they are donating their efforts. This is being done because it is what is necessary to ensure that the students of the school are able to continue receiving the high caliber education that they had become familiar with.
Now that I have brought up the issue, what can be done to remedy such ridiculous situations? One option, as previously suggested, is to do a better job of allocating resources. LAUSD should not be throwing money at products such as the Smart Board when its member schools can barely maintain a staff of 50 people.
A second possibility, which is a very hot-button issue during such difficult economic times, is to raise taxes. Yes, everybody is strapped when it comes to paying their taxes, but why not throw a little bit more money towards the government? This tax would be specifically for educational purposes and would be funneled back down to LAUSD. Providing the school system with more capital, unfortunately does not mean that it will be allocated properly, and go towards what is truly needed. It would be a necessity to put into place some kind of system that would ensure that this new source of money would go into paying the salaries of the most essential aspect of our schools. The technology is not what must be ensured. Rather, it is the maintenance of the faculty that use such resources that have futures that are in jeopardy.
My question is the following: will the Smart Boards teach our students? Will the computers? The answer is a very simple one: NO! It is a necessity of the education system to have teachers providing students with a vital learning experience. So once again, LAUSD please pay heed to my call. Please stop mismanaging your resources and funnel enough capital to your member schools to really be able to provide the necessary resources, our teachers.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
A Plea to Prioritize
Just like a roller coaster, everyone has enjoyed watching our economy as it has followed its up and down, looping course. Wait, I have that wrong. Nobody has enjoyed watching what has happened to our economy. Even more than not wanting the roller coaster to stay on its current path, there is not a single person, to my knowledge, who has reveled in the budget cuts to which our county’s education system has been subjected.
Yes when one looks at the numbers it can be viably argued that the monetary value of the cuts made has been necessary. But, in my opinion, the government has not prioritized these cuts properly. At a time when everybody is looking towards the future, the State has been incredibly misguided in having chosen the education budget as the one to be cut rather than countless other budgets.
While it may be controversial to make the claim that certain budgets be cut more than others, in the long-run, cutting the education budget less will directly cause there to be less need for larger budgets in other areas. Take for example the projected Health and Human Services budget for California in 2010-2011. Currently there has been approximately $29, 792, 401 allotted to this department. While I firmly believe that it is important to put money towards health services, by putting some of this money into the Department of Education, I believe that the same end can be reached. In having a larger budget to put towards education, California schools will be able to continue employing its teachers and staff. By keeping people on staff, schools will be better able to educate their students on important issues, such as healthy eating and practicing safe sex. Thanks to being able to maintain a staff that can teach the state’s children in such subjects, California will be able to save money when it comes to health services, meaning that less money can be put towards this department.
There is no doubt that during the recent recession everybody has been strapped for money. But those of us living in California are also put in a tough place when our education is forced to take a massive hit because there is not enough money. I can only speak for myself and those I have talked to, but a slight increase in taxes to ensure that there is a future for California’s education system is something that is acceptable. By slightly increasing the amount of taxes paid to the state, thee will be more money that can be divided amongst the individual departmental budgets, in particular education.
The situation has become so dire for some schools, such as Carthay Center Elementary in Los Angeles Unified School District 4, that fundraising has begun within the school in order to be able to pay the salaries of some faculty members. The school needs to raise $20,000 before September 30 in order to be able to keep its librarian on staff. I ask the following to the state of California and those deciding the budget: is it really worth not providing schools with enough money to be able to keep a librarian on staff? Is putting money towards other things worth keeping children from learning to read? To me the answer to both of these questions is incredibly clear: NO!
It is true that during times such as now, when all pockets are feeling lighter, there is no doubt that it is difficult to decide where money should go and how it should be spent. However, as I have stated, it is quite possible to argue for certain aspects of life to be allocated more money than others. By putting more money towards education, California easily will be able to save money in other areas. But the state has to be patient. The state must learn to prioritize which budgets receive how much money. Maybe if we put more money into our education system, the government would have learned better and finally realize how important education is to our present and future.
Yes when one looks at the numbers it can be viably argued that the monetary value of the cuts made has been necessary. But, in my opinion, the government has not prioritized these cuts properly. At a time when everybody is looking towards the future, the State has been incredibly misguided in having chosen the education budget as the one to be cut rather than countless other budgets.
While it may be controversial to make the claim that certain budgets be cut more than others, in the long-run, cutting the education budget less will directly cause there to be less need for larger budgets in other areas. Take for example the projected Health and Human Services budget for California in 2010-2011. Currently there has been approximately $29, 792, 401 allotted to this department. While I firmly believe that it is important to put money towards health services, by putting some of this money into the Department of Education, I believe that the same end can be reached. In having a larger budget to put towards education, California schools will be able to continue employing its teachers and staff. By keeping people on staff, schools will be better able to educate their students on important issues, such as healthy eating and practicing safe sex. Thanks to being able to maintain a staff that can teach the state’s children in such subjects, California will be able to save money when it comes to health services, meaning that less money can be put towards this department.
There is no doubt that during the recent recession everybody has been strapped for money. But those of us living in California are also put in a tough place when our education is forced to take a massive hit because there is not enough money. I can only speak for myself and those I have talked to, but a slight increase in taxes to ensure that there is a future for California’s education system is something that is acceptable. By slightly increasing the amount of taxes paid to the state, thee will be more money that can be divided amongst the individual departmental budgets, in particular education.
The situation has become so dire for some schools, such as Carthay Center Elementary in Los Angeles Unified School District 4, that fundraising has begun within the school in order to be able to pay the salaries of some faculty members. The school needs to raise $20,000 before September 30 in order to be able to keep its librarian on staff. I ask the following to the state of California and those deciding the budget: is it really worth not providing schools with enough money to be able to keep a librarian on staff? Is putting money towards other things worth keeping children from learning to read? To me the answer to both of these questions is incredibly clear: NO!
It is true that during times such as now, when all pockets are feeling lighter, there is no doubt that it is difficult to decide where money should go and how it should be spent. However, as I have stated, it is quite possible to argue for certain aspects of life to be allocated more money than others. By putting more money towards education, California easily will be able to save money in other areas. But the state has to be patient. The state must learn to prioritize which budgets receive how much money. Maybe if we put more money into our education system, the government would have learned better and finally realize how important education is to our present and future.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Special Interaction
When anybody thinks about schools, what it is that they think of is the picture-perfect classroom that we have all seen in movies and T.V. shows. The general public tends to think about the ideal learning environment, with all the pieces falling into place. Based upon the American Dream, schools should all be completely flawless conglomerations. However, in reality this is not even close to being the case. One of the biggest issues that I have with schools is that there is not enough integration of special needs programs with the rest of the institution they are a part of, if they are even associated with one. Yes, there are some institutions of learning that do have special needs programs, and even a few of them have integrated these programs. Unfortunately, the majority of schools that have such programs have kept them separate from the rest of their students. Over the course of this paper, I will be introducing a brief discussion of the state of a large number of special needs programs, presenting multiple perspectives of the issue, and a discourse on what would be gained by all students by increasing interactions between typical and atypical students. I will also be providing readers with ways to increase these very interactions, as well as their importance and how having such relations at different stages have the ability to succeed in different ways. We have been making leaps and bounds in terms of improving the situation when it comes to increasing interactions between those with special needs and other students. But we have not made it far enough!
Some schools have progressed to the point of creating special needs programs, which has been a fantastic success for the system. The issue, however, is that many of these programs, while officially a part of the academic institution, are separated from the remainder of the school. It is not necessarily an issue of atypical students being in the same classrooms as typical students, for this is not always a feasible course of action to pursue. The bigger concern is that a majority of schools have created a rift between these two factions to the point that they do not have interactions with one another. Some schools have even gone as far as not only completely refraining from mainstreaming of any kind, but they have even placed such programs in separate sections of the school. By doing this, these institutions have affectively not only separated students classified as having special needs from the rest of the school, but have also removed such programs from sight completely. In doing this, a major aspect of special needs programs is totally removed. It is true that individuals who are placed in such programs received the necessary assistance over the course of their education. While this might be true, these students also lose out on a crucial aspect of attending school, and that is the chance to interact with other students, just like all of their peers have the opportunity to do everyday.
Thinking back to my time in school, my fondest memories are not those that involve me sitting in classrooms. Rather, they all involve recollections of sitting around with my friends and talking with everyone else in the quad. This is an incredibly difficult thing for special needs programs to accomplish if they are in a situation that causes them to be separated from the entirety of the school. When this is the case, these programs are usually not only housed in separate buildings or sections of the school, but they are also kept from interactions such as those I just described with the rest of their schools. From personal experience working at a school that separates atypical students from typical students, those in the special needs program usually are not even given the opportunity to share time on the playground with the rest of the students at their school. While this may appear as a small deal, for those students who have to sit in a classroom and watch the entirety of their school out on the yard together it is anything but. Jacob Artson, a 17-year-old boy who has been diagnosed with severe autism, very eloquently stated in his article “Encumbered and Blessed” in CJ: Voices of Conservative/Masorti Judaism, students who have been classified as being different from everyone else because they have “special needs” often find themselves feeling incredibly lonely. When one thinks about this in regards to the school system, the fact that often these very individuals are segregated from their peers only goes to make students in such programs feel even more alone.
On the flip side of having schools that have special needs programs, there are those programs that are exclusively special needs. In my opinion these programs are far more detrimental to the individuals who are a part of them than those that separate such individuals from the rest of their institution. By not having programs that interact with typical students, those who have been classified as atypical very easily being to view themselves in the same way that those who do not understand them. They begin to see there being something wrong with themselves, as being individuals who actually need to be completely separated from those who do are not attached to the same labels. Is it really worth subjecting individuals to such feelings when they already often feel alone in the world? Do those in special needs programs truly deserve to be in situations that force them to not only recognize that they are different than everybody else, but to believe that what makes them unique individuals is a negative attribute? Unfortunately, sometimes it even gets to the point where individuals begin to feel that the treatment they receive is something that they deserve, when in reality it is the furthest thing from what they do be worthy of.
The best way to remedy these issues that have been addressed, of those in special needs programs being separated from the rest of their schools and being put in the position of belittling themselves due to being alone, is to provide these individuals with the opportunities to interact with their typical counterparts. Before delving into ways to enable individuals to interact with those outside of their special needs programs, I will present the benefits of having such interactions. A key factor in allowing there to be inclusion within classrooms is the establishment of specifically designed instruction for those students with special needs based upon their least restrictive environment, also known as LRE. Prior to developing the LRE, it is federally required that an individualized educational program, or IEP, is created. By establishing an IEP, schools are capable of providing students with the necessary environment in which their academic futures can best be fostered, and a large part of this experience is being in the same setting as their typical classmates. While it may seem a tad bit counter-intuitive, due to the fact that children who have been classified as having special needs require the development of educational programs specifically geared towards them, they truly benefit by being in the same classroom setting as their peers. Similar ends can be reached by other methods that are not necessarily geared towards creating classrooms that are based upon inclusion, but rather tactics of integration.
Additional benefits of inclusion and integration of those in special education programs are abundant, as are those for other students as well. One of the major upsides to such projects is opening these individuals to environments with increased stimulants. There are a number of instances of course, caused by certain neurological conditions, where this increase in stimulants can make it more difficult for individuals to receive the education which they rightly deserve. Even more than being provided with environments that further stimulate their minds, inclusion programs for those with special needs provide these students with role models who emulate positive behaviors with which some of these individuals struggle, such as communication and social interactions. At the top of the list of benefits to inclusion programs is greater acceptance of those in special needs programs by their peers. In creating environments that foster an increase in the acceptance of those who are a part of such programs, individuals outside of the program are more willing not only to accept their peers who they had previously viewed as being different and not worth they time, but also to spread what they learn about their peers to others. Opposite the benefits of those within special needs programs are those for their peers outside of the program. As stated previously, interactions between typical and atypical students enable those students classified as typical to increase their acceptance of individual differences. At the same time, these same individuals become more comfortable with those students who have been termed as having disabilities. Often times individuals are uncomfortable interacting with their fellow students who are a part of special needs programs because they find themselves in situations that are unfamiliar. So, there are all these advantages to institutions having inclusion/integration programs, but how do they go about making those outside of the program more comfortable and make such policies viable?
A key step to making special needs programs more inclusive and geared towards integration is increasing the visibility of those who are a party of such programs. The accomplishment of such a task is not as difficult as one might first suspect. There are a number of very simple, steps that can be taken by schools, which are quite easy to enact and do not even require the hiring of additional, specialized staff members. One of the easiest ways to increase the visibility of special needs programs that are already in place at schools is to allow students in these programs to share time on the playground with their typical counterparts. By providing these students with a few minutes of time on the blacktop with the rest of their schoolmates, they are empowered to feel more like the rest of children. By being given the chance to feel like the rest of their schoolmates, they are provided with a reason to no longer doubt themselves, but rather to become more confident in their abilities and in their social skills. Another simple step that can be taken, which would accomplish the very same ends is to allow individuals who are in special needs programs to share a lunch period with other students. A final suggestion of a way to make special needs programs that have previously been separated more visible is to the rest of their schools is to have shared hallways. In having shared hallways, a goal that can be accomplished by having both special needs students and other students having their lockers on the same hall, visibility of special needs individuals can easily be seen and those who have not been classified as being special needs, or do not have experience with such individuals, have a means of becoming more familiar and therefore more comfortable. These are only a few of the many methods that could help in accomplishing increased, or even initial, inclusion and/or integration of those students in special needs programs.
While it is important to set-up a system that enables there to be integration and inclusion of those labeled as having special needs, the level of success can very much be dependent upon at what stage these policies and processes are put into practice. Steps such as those suggested in the previous paragraph can be put into action at virtually any stage in one’s education, but I believe that the later on one begins to be exposed to such policies as would increase the integration of special needs programs, the less successful these steps will be. A major benefit that results from these actions is increasing the level of acceptance of special needs individuals and of individual differences, which will be reached with more successful results if begun at a younger age. In doing this, beginning at a younger age, typical students are made more comfortable and familiar with special needs and everything that surrounds those with special needs. As exposure to the world of special needs is increasingly made a part of the education of younger students, they become more familiar and comfortable with those individuals in such programs.
The term “advancement” is defined as “the process of promoting a cause or a plan”. When it comes to special needs programs, all school systems have advanced an incredible amount. Originally, there was absolutely no recognition of the fact that those with special needs require an education just as much, if not more, than their peers without the label. The first step in this advancement was the recognition that educating such individuals is a necessity. The next step was to create a system by which individuals with special needs effectively receive the education they rightly deserve. A third, and major step in the advancement of special needs education was the creation of programs specifically for those with special needs. After this, the integration and inclusion of such programs is the next, and currently the most pressing, step to be taken. While it is quite possible to integrate and include those in special needs programs with the rest of the school, there have not been massive actions taken to make this possibility a reality. There are some schools that have successfully enacted policies that have enabled those with special needs to become a part of their school communities. As I have previously stated, it is my opinion that these actions are either not enough or they have not been taken by enough schools to truly accomplish the end that it easily could. Despite the fact that the integration of special needs programs has not necessarily been successful to the ends that it could be, this situation could possibly be remedied with the enactment of a number of rather simple conceptions. As I have previously stated, a very key, and initial, steps that should be taken in order to achieve the integration, and to certain levels inclusion of, special needs programs is to create policies that serve to increase the visibility of both the programs and their participants. Yes, there are a great many more steps that not only should, but also actually need to be taken, in order to achieve proper and necessary levels of integration and inclusion. But how is advancement in any area made? Not by expecting everything to fall into place and all happen at once. Rather, by taking things one step at a time, all advancements not only occur, but actually do so infinitely more effectively. And the case of inclusion and integration of special needs programs is no different than the advancement of any other issue. It all happens because of the enactment of small steps, and with special needs programs, the next small step to be taken is to increase the visibility of these programs.
Works Cited
Artson, Jacob. "Encumbered and Blessed." CJ: Voices of Conservative/Masorti Judaism.
Spring 2010: 37-9.
Block, Martin E. “Rational for and Benefits of Inclusion?” About.com.
/Inclusion2.html>.
Greenberg, Judith. “Inclusion and your Special Education Student Who Benefits?”.
Internet Special Education Resources.
National Center For Educational Statistics. “Inclusion of Special-Needs Students”.
U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences.
.
Office of State Superintendent of Public Instruction. New Horizons For Learning.
.
Watson, Sue. “Setting Them Up for Success Checklist”. About.com.
.
Wisconsin Education Association Council. “Special Education Inclusion”. WEAC.
Some schools have progressed to the point of creating special needs programs, which has been a fantastic success for the system. The issue, however, is that many of these programs, while officially a part of the academic institution, are separated from the remainder of the school. It is not necessarily an issue of atypical students being in the same classrooms as typical students, for this is not always a feasible course of action to pursue. The bigger concern is that a majority of schools have created a rift between these two factions to the point that they do not have interactions with one another. Some schools have even gone as far as not only completely refraining from mainstreaming of any kind, but they have even placed such programs in separate sections of the school. By doing this, these institutions have affectively not only separated students classified as having special needs from the rest of the school, but have also removed such programs from sight completely. In doing this, a major aspect of special needs programs is totally removed. It is true that individuals who are placed in such programs received the necessary assistance over the course of their education. While this might be true, these students also lose out on a crucial aspect of attending school, and that is the chance to interact with other students, just like all of their peers have the opportunity to do everyday.
Thinking back to my time in school, my fondest memories are not those that involve me sitting in classrooms. Rather, they all involve recollections of sitting around with my friends and talking with everyone else in the quad. This is an incredibly difficult thing for special needs programs to accomplish if they are in a situation that causes them to be separated from the entirety of the school. When this is the case, these programs are usually not only housed in separate buildings or sections of the school, but they are also kept from interactions such as those I just described with the rest of their schools. From personal experience working at a school that separates atypical students from typical students, those in the special needs program usually are not even given the opportunity to share time on the playground with the rest of the students at their school. While this may appear as a small deal, for those students who have to sit in a classroom and watch the entirety of their school out on the yard together it is anything but. Jacob Artson, a 17-year-old boy who has been diagnosed with severe autism, very eloquently stated in his article “Encumbered and Blessed” in CJ: Voices of Conservative/Masorti Judaism, students who have been classified as being different from everyone else because they have “special needs” often find themselves feeling incredibly lonely. When one thinks about this in regards to the school system, the fact that often these very individuals are segregated from their peers only goes to make students in such programs feel even more alone.
On the flip side of having schools that have special needs programs, there are those programs that are exclusively special needs. In my opinion these programs are far more detrimental to the individuals who are a part of them than those that separate such individuals from the rest of their institution. By not having programs that interact with typical students, those who have been classified as atypical very easily being to view themselves in the same way that those who do not understand them. They begin to see there being something wrong with themselves, as being individuals who actually need to be completely separated from those who do are not attached to the same labels. Is it really worth subjecting individuals to such feelings when they already often feel alone in the world? Do those in special needs programs truly deserve to be in situations that force them to not only recognize that they are different than everybody else, but to believe that what makes them unique individuals is a negative attribute? Unfortunately, sometimes it even gets to the point where individuals begin to feel that the treatment they receive is something that they deserve, when in reality it is the furthest thing from what they do be worthy of.
The best way to remedy these issues that have been addressed, of those in special needs programs being separated from the rest of their schools and being put in the position of belittling themselves due to being alone, is to provide these individuals with the opportunities to interact with their typical counterparts. Before delving into ways to enable individuals to interact with those outside of their special needs programs, I will present the benefits of having such interactions. A key factor in allowing there to be inclusion within classrooms is the establishment of specifically designed instruction for those students with special needs based upon their least restrictive environment, also known as LRE. Prior to developing the LRE, it is federally required that an individualized educational program, or IEP, is created. By establishing an IEP, schools are capable of providing students with the necessary environment in which their academic futures can best be fostered, and a large part of this experience is being in the same setting as their typical classmates. While it may seem a tad bit counter-intuitive, due to the fact that children who have been classified as having special needs require the development of educational programs specifically geared towards them, they truly benefit by being in the same classroom setting as their peers. Similar ends can be reached by other methods that are not necessarily geared towards creating classrooms that are based upon inclusion, but rather tactics of integration.
Additional benefits of inclusion and integration of those in special education programs are abundant, as are those for other students as well. One of the major upsides to such projects is opening these individuals to environments with increased stimulants. There are a number of instances of course, caused by certain neurological conditions, where this increase in stimulants can make it more difficult for individuals to receive the education which they rightly deserve. Even more than being provided with environments that further stimulate their minds, inclusion programs for those with special needs provide these students with role models who emulate positive behaviors with which some of these individuals struggle, such as communication and social interactions. At the top of the list of benefits to inclusion programs is greater acceptance of those in special needs programs by their peers. In creating environments that foster an increase in the acceptance of those who are a part of such programs, individuals outside of the program are more willing not only to accept their peers who they had previously viewed as being different and not worth they time, but also to spread what they learn about their peers to others. Opposite the benefits of those within special needs programs are those for their peers outside of the program. As stated previously, interactions between typical and atypical students enable those students classified as typical to increase their acceptance of individual differences. At the same time, these same individuals become more comfortable with those students who have been termed as having disabilities. Often times individuals are uncomfortable interacting with their fellow students who are a part of special needs programs because they find themselves in situations that are unfamiliar. So, there are all these advantages to institutions having inclusion/integration programs, but how do they go about making those outside of the program more comfortable and make such policies viable?
A key step to making special needs programs more inclusive and geared towards integration is increasing the visibility of those who are a party of such programs. The accomplishment of such a task is not as difficult as one might first suspect. There are a number of very simple, steps that can be taken by schools, which are quite easy to enact and do not even require the hiring of additional, specialized staff members. One of the easiest ways to increase the visibility of special needs programs that are already in place at schools is to allow students in these programs to share time on the playground with their typical counterparts. By providing these students with a few minutes of time on the blacktop with the rest of their schoolmates, they are empowered to feel more like the rest of children. By being given the chance to feel like the rest of their schoolmates, they are provided with a reason to no longer doubt themselves, but rather to become more confident in their abilities and in their social skills. Another simple step that can be taken, which would accomplish the very same ends is to allow individuals who are in special needs programs to share a lunch period with other students. A final suggestion of a way to make special needs programs that have previously been separated more visible is to the rest of their schools is to have shared hallways. In having shared hallways, a goal that can be accomplished by having both special needs students and other students having their lockers on the same hall, visibility of special needs individuals can easily be seen and those who have not been classified as being special needs, or do not have experience with such individuals, have a means of becoming more familiar and therefore more comfortable. These are only a few of the many methods that could help in accomplishing increased, or even initial, inclusion and/or integration of those students in special needs programs.
While it is important to set-up a system that enables there to be integration and inclusion of those labeled as having special needs, the level of success can very much be dependent upon at what stage these policies and processes are put into practice. Steps such as those suggested in the previous paragraph can be put into action at virtually any stage in one’s education, but I believe that the later on one begins to be exposed to such policies as would increase the integration of special needs programs, the less successful these steps will be. A major benefit that results from these actions is increasing the level of acceptance of special needs individuals and of individual differences, which will be reached with more successful results if begun at a younger age. In doing this, beginning at a younger age, typical students are made more comfortable and familiar with special needs and everything that surrounds those with special needs. As exposure to the world of special needs is increasingly made a part of the education of younger students, they become more familiar and comfortable with those individuals in such programs.
The term “advancement” is defined as “the process of promoting a cause or a plan”. When it comes to special needs programs, all school systems have advanced an incredible amount. Originally, there was absolutely no recognition of the fact that those with special needs require an education just as much, if not more, than their peers without the label. The first step in this advancement was the recognition that educating such individuals is a necessity. The next step was to create a system by which individuals with special needs effectively receive the education they rightly deserve. A third, and major step in the advancement of special needs education was the creation of programs specifically for those with special needs. After this, the integration and inclusion of such programs is the next, and currently the most pressing, step to be taken. While it is quite possible to integrate and include those in special needs programs with the rest of the school, there have not been massive actions taken to make this possibility a reality. There are some schools that have successfully enacted policies that have enabled those with special needs to become a part of their school communities. As I have previously stated, it is my opinion that these actions are either not enough or they have not been taken by enough schools to truly accomplish the end that it easily could. Despite the fact that the integration of special needs programs has not necessarily been successful to the ends that it could be, this situation could possibly be remedied with the enactment of a number of rather simple conceptions. As I have previously stated, a very key, and initial, steps that should be taken in order to achieve the integration, and to certain levels inclusion of, special needs programs is to create policies that serve to increase the visibility of both the programs and their participants. Yes, there are a great many more steps that not only should, but also actually need to be taken, in order to achieve proper and necessary levels of integration and inclusion. But how is advancement in any area made? Not by expecting everything to fall into place and all happen at once. Rather, by taking things one step at a time, all advancements not only occur, but actually do so infinitely more effectively. And the case of inclusion and integration of special needs programs is no different than the advancement of any other issue. It all happens because of the enactment of small steps, and with special needs programs, the next small step to be taken is to increase the visibility of these programs.
Works Cited
Artson, Jacob. "Encumbered and Blessed." CJ: Voices of Conservative/Masorti Judaism.
Spring 2010: 37-9.
Block, Martin E. “Rational for and Benefits of Inclusion?” About.com.
/Inclusion2.html>.
Greenberg, Judith. “Inclusion and your Special Education Student Who Benefits?”.
Internet Special Education Resources.
National Center For Educational Statistics. “Inclusion of Special-Needs Students”.
U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences.
Office of State Superintendent of Public Instruction. New Horizons For Learning.
Watson, Sue. “Setting Them Up for Success Checklist”. About.com.
Wisconsin Education Association Council. “Special Education Inclusion”. WEAC.
Monday, March 8, 2010
The Price of Success
As alluded to in my previous post, "Student-Teacher Relationships", we all strive to succeed and reach greatness. But what is the cost we all must pay in order to reach the level that we desire? Can the success we all strive for be one of the obstacles to achieving that very end? According to Stephen Mack in his post "Climbing the Ladder of Success (or Be Careful of What You Wish For)", the renowned author makes the claim that the economic success of our country is quite possibly one of the greatest threats to the ideal of democracy upon which the United States was founded.
We, as Americans are continuously striving to end inequality, but in our efforts really only succeed in furthering inequality. In attempting to bring equality to the country, we have brought to the attention of all that we are a nation truly divided based upon economic standing, a fact that once people are enlightened to can no longer be ignored. When people are educated to the fact that, based upon economic demographics, they are considered to be above others, inequality is not, in general, combated, but rather is accepted as inherent to society.
Why accept this fact? Why not further educate ourselves on the issues which have created the apparent disparity between classes in America? Once we have done this, it will be infinitely easier to succeed in righting the issue of inequality. It is time that we all do a little self-education and start climbing the ladder properly, along with our peers.
We, as Americans are continuously striving to end inequality, but in our efforts really only succeed in furthering inequality. In attempting to bring equality to the country, we have brought to the attention of all that we are a nation truly divided based upon economic standing, a fact that once people are enlightened to can no longer be ignored. When people are educated to the fact that, based upon economic demographics, they are considered to be above others, inequality is not, in general, combated, but rather is accepted as inherent to society.
Why accept this fact? Why not further educate ourselves on the issues which have created the apparent disparity between classes in America? Once we have done this, it will be infinitely easier to succeed in righting the issue of inequality. It is time that we all do a little self-education and start climbing the ladder properly, along with our peers.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Student-Teacher Relationships
Of course being interested in a particular subject makes sitting in a classroom enjoyable and enables students to get through any given class period. But more than having an interest in the topic, having a relationship with one's teacher goes even further in accomplishing this end. I do not mean this in the sense of the student-teacher relationships that we all see plastered over the news, telling us of the sexual indiscretions to which some educators are party. When I say that it is vital for there to be a relationship between teachers and students, I am talking about not only seeing one another in these two roles, but rather having a deeper connection closer to that of friendship.
While the establishment of a positive student-teacher relationship seems to be something easily accomplished, it is quite the contrary. On the one hand, creating a relationship of this nature is difficult because of the fact that students often see their educators as authority figures and nothing else. However, on the other hand, teachers must tread carefully so as not to cross any lines and, at the same time, maintain the status of authority figure within the classroom. In large part, these issues of forging a positive relationship rests upon a mutual understanding of teachers of their students and vice versa.
For those of us who work with students it is often difficult to remember what it was like when we were their age. This first step is necessary in teachers forming an understanding of their students. Remembering what it was like to be in our students' seats is key because it allows us to recall what we thought of our teachers at that age, which in turn opens up the possibility of understanding what it is that those we are teaching think of their educators. By forging positive relationships of this nature with our students, they become much more eager to listen to what we have to say and to learn from us.
From my experience these relationships do not stem solely from how the two roles interact with one another in the classroom. The teachers I always had the deepest connections with were those to whom I could relate, those who took a vested interest in my education. But they also took an interest in me as a person. They were the teachers who asked me questions about what I took an interest in, and made the effort to stay up to speed with my activities. I even had a handful of teachers who I would see on the sideline at my sporting events and those of my classmates. These teachers, who took a vested interest in my life, both in the classroom and outside of it, are those who I had the best relationships with and who have influenced my educational life the most.
It is these teachers who are the reason I have taken such an interest in my own education and am pursuing a career to help others come to the same realization for themselves. A study conducted in 2009 suggest that those students sharing a healthy relationship with their teachers have been known to achieve higher success rates. The earlier in one's educational career one begins to form positive and healthy relationships with teachers, the more successful the individual will be as a student.
As teachers we of course aim to impart our particular areas of expertise to our students, but more importantly we hope to impact their lives in a lasting manner. We, as educators, hope to influence students to continue to actively pursue their education.
While the establishment of a positive student-teacher relationship seems to be something easily accomplished, it is quite the contrary. On the one hand, creating a relationship of this nature is difficult because of the fact that students often see their educators as authority figures and nothing else. However, on the other hand, teachers must tread carefully so as not to cross any lines and, at the same time, maintain the status of authority figure within the classroom. In large part, these issues of forging a positive relationship rests upon a mutual understanding of teachers of their students and vice versa.
For those of us who work with students it is often difficult to remember what it was like when we were their age. This first step is necessary in teachers forming an understanding of their students. Remembering what it was like to be in our students' seats is key because it allows us to recall what we thought of our teachers at that age, which in turn opens up the possibility of understanding what it is that those we are teaching think of their educators. By forging positive relationships of this nature with our students, they become much more eager to listen to what we have to say and to learn from us.
From my experience these relationships do not stem solely from how the two roles interact with one another in the classroom. The teachers I always had the deepest connections with were those to whom I could relate, those who took a vested interest in my education. But they also took an interest in me as a person. They were the teachers who asked me questions about what I took an interest in, and made the effort to stay up to speed with my activities. I even had a handful of teachers who I would see on the sideline at my sporting events and those of my classmates. These teachers, who took a vested interest in my life, both in the classroom and outside of it, are those who I had the best relationships with and who have influenced my educational life the most.
It is these teachers who are the reason I have taken such an interest in my own education and am pursuing a career to help others come to the same realization for themselves. A study conducted in 2009 suggest that those students sharing a healthy relationship with their teachers have been known to achieve higher success rates. The earlier in one's educational career one begins to form positive and healthy relationships with teachers, the more successful the individual will be as a student.
As teachers we of course aim to impart our particular areas of expertise to our students, but more importantly we hope to impact their lives in a lasting manner. We, as educators, hope to influence students to continue to actively pursue their education.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)