Regular and Special Ed Class Separation in Schools

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
I would like feedback on one of the issues that came up during a School Committee meeting I attended. Since I know there are a lot of students and people with experience in special education on Smogon, I wanted to get the perspective from your side of the classroom.

The basic argument was about inclusion, which drilled down to basics means including Special Ed students in with Regular Ed students within a curriculum. Each Special Ed student however has their own Individualized Education Program (IEP).

That's not the only separation I'm interested in though. Special Ed and Regular Ed have entirely separate issues. What I'm also looking for is experiences with class tiers in Regular Ed like honors classes vs. normal or other gradient classifications.

Does your school have any of these separations? How do you interact with students in "higher" or "lower" classes? If you have a class that combines Regular and Special Ed, I would be greatly interested. I'm trying to piece together a coherent position on class separation and I need more insight from the people who actually live it every day. It's been several years since I was in a classroom environment and I didn't really pay attention to all the details back then.
 
I don't even get a chance to associate with the special education students at my school unless I wanted to sit with them at lunch. I don't really think of it as segregation or anything like that though, they are just benefitted by having different classes apart from average students.

Also, (I've posted this before yes,) I play volleyball for my school and there's this one local school who for the past 2 years has used a special education student to deliver water bottles to the players during timeouts or what have you. And yes I've come to understand that this particular person probably wanted to be involved and this is the best way for him to be involved, but it still seems wrong to me from a moral standpoint
 
There's a few Special Ed people in my school. Granted, I don't see them much anymore (they're maybe 5 in 1300 people) but I saw them way more in middle school. Honestly, it seems like they'd be better off in their own classes. Including them in regular classes with students without an IEP causes problems all around - the S.E. students tend to be rather disruptive (from my experience) but at the same time they really can't learn from a normal class when they're behind. My middle school integrated them for a few classes (one was in my homeroom and apparently one was in a friend's Tech Ed class) but keep them separate for other classes.

Also, to get this straight: not every mental disorder warrants Special Education - I know a few people with disorders such as Asperger's and ADHD and they're some of my best friends (except one, but he's just a douche in general) and end up in high-level classes.
 
I think every kid needs an IEP, honestly. No two kids are the same and the 30 kids to a teacher system is one of the biggest problems with our education system in my uneducated opinion. So having 1,000 kids to an Education Plan is a nightmare.

I'm a bus driver for a very rich and influential county in Northern Virginia and one of their current "big plans" is inclusion. They want to make special ed students as independent as possible. Which I feel is a very good thing. There is an elementary student on my current run who was in leg braces a few years ago and now is able to walk without them. Were it a few years ago she would have had to ride a "short" bus and would have had a bus attendant helping her up the stairs. Because of the county's new policies she rides a regular ed bus with her friends and brother and has learned to walk up the stairs on her own. I can't see this as anything but a good thing. (btw, we call them small and big buses now. :) )

As for your other question, I went to a high school with the International Baccalaureate program and while I wasn't in that I've been in the various gifted programs in my schools. GATE, Gifted and Talented Education, in elementary school in Ohio and SIGNET, hell if I remember what that stands for, in Virginia. I was very happy to be in these programs as they were always interesting and fun to me.

My brother has always had the idea that he wasn't very smart (which is not true, I think he's just as intelligent as I am) and I can see how that could have stemmed from having a brother who is in these types of programs when he's not. I can imagine that extends to other children when they see that other kids are in gifted and talented programs and they aren't. I also know that it is a serious problem as far as teachers, administrators, and bus drivers giving them special treatment. "Oh, well, Johnny says you hit HIM and he's in SIGNET/IB so I believe him."

Now that I've mentioned IB I'll add that that is a whole other monster. My school was made up of kids from every economic background and there was a strong correlation between kids from rich families and kids in the IB program. So the IB program was made up of kids who thought they were better than everyone else because they had nicer things and the teachers told them they were better than everyone else. Most of them were very "classist" and didn't like to associate with people outside the program very much. My friend who was IB was shunned when she began dating my friend who was not IB. It was so bad that senior year Art was the only IB class she took. Anyway, that concludes my rant. I'll add more when I have more time to think about it.
 
I have an IEP, but mainly because my terrible English skills. Although I am fine academically in every other respect, I am even in honors courses. I would find it offensive if I had to be places in special ed classes, seeing as normally I get higher grades then most people in English for the pure fact I just hand things in on time. The only thing I use my IEP for is occasionally notes, and sometimes more leniency with my spelling and grammar.

I was also in full special ed when I was a kid, I didn’t belong there, I got 100% on every test and had scientific debates with the teachers. Some kids need it, but to be honest 80% of the kids there just need a bit more support or leniency, and would benefit a lot from being in regular classes, more so then special ed. Let the kids do what they want to do, if they want help, they will ask; and even if you don’t know, guidance counselors are search for kids that should be in special ed, if they really need it.
 
I support the idea of streaming.

There's a policy that's developed by liberals that started in the UK (where they're now starting to move away from it), but there are pushes for it here, which is that there should be no special ed classes, either remedial or advanced. The idea is that by segregating them, the remedial students get ostracised and the self-esteem of the people kept out of the advanced classes is damaged because "they're just a normal person". There's also an argument that exposure to the advanced, well-behaved students is beneficial to the worse students because the intelligence and motivation will 'rub off'.

That latter point especially is utter bollocks. Empirically, we know that's not what happens. The proponents of this plan like to believe that there's no such thing as a smart person; that everyone is the same and it's just about what methods you use to teach them. In fact, what's quite likely to happen when you put an advanced student in a general class is that some general students will stop trying because they know they won't catch that person. The advanced student may become ostracised, but more importantly they'll often become bored.

The reality is that there are differences in the intellectual ability of people, children included. We know it's not just "how you test them makes the difference" because most of the time the people who score highly on one test will score highly on all the alternative measures of what constitutes intelligence, and vice-versa for those who score low.

Giving a remedial student work at a speed that is too fast for them doesn't help them in the slightest. Giving an advanced student work far below their level doesn't help them.

The optimal learning environment would be individually tailored curricula for each student, so they could learn at the pace they're best suited. The obvious difficulty is that it's practically unfeasible. The amount of time and money it would cost to administer such a program, even to create the program in the first place, is just too much.

Ultimately, though, I think the happy medium is a set of gradient classes for each subject. For the most part, there will be people of roughly the same learning capacity; the difference between one student and the next is narrower for some than for others. For that reason, you can separate a group of the most advanced, and the second-most advanced, and so on down to the slowest. Now the advanced students aren't held back by the weakest link in their class, and the remedial students aren't subjected to unfair pressures from stuff that's too advanced for them. Everyone has what's close to their optimal learning speed. (You'll have some arbitrariness and noise around the fringes of each class, but that can be solved year to year by moving students up or down based on their results and requests).
 
Scarfwynaut said:
Some kids need it, but to be honest 80% of the kids there just need a bit more support or leniency, and would benefit a lot from being in regular classes, more so then special ed.
This. This this this. Most of the time, special ed kids really don't need to be seperated from the rest of the class; there are a handful of exceptions, but by the time you get up to the kind of populations (2,000+ from my experience) where that's anywhere near needed, it's practical enough to put them in their own class.
 
Most of the art classes at my school combine special ed kids and regular kids. If the special ed kids are really special, a special ed teacher will come to the class. There are rarely any problems. I talk to the special ed kids all the time but most people don't.
 
I go to a high school where some special ed students are separate from the rest of the student body.They are the severely handicapped students, who either cannot talk, walk, or function on their own. They eat at different times, have different halls, different rooms, and pass at different times. Honestly, I think this is the best approach to students like them. There isn't any possible way that they could function in a normal classroom setting, and they need very specialized help which they would not receive otherwise.

There are other normal level classes that mid to high function autistics/other milder mental handicaps can be in with regular students, which I have mixed feelings on. Some of them, I feel, still do not have the mental capacity to be in a normal class. From my experiences in grade school, where they did not have different level classes, I found that the two special ed children held things back. They often needed huge amounts of extra help, which took the teacher's time away from the other children, who in turn fell behind.

I do not think that all mental disorders warrant special classes, but if it is bad enough that they cannot function in a regular class, then they need to be put somewhere else. It isn't fair to the kids who actually belong in the class and need the time of the teacher, and it isn't fair to the special ed kids who cannot keep up no matter how hard they try.
 
I Have A.D.D and a learning disability. I was always glad that there were separate classes for kids with IEPs like me because I knew all along that I didn't learn as fast as other kids, even though I really tried. Worrying about looking stupid in front of the kids who could do everything right put me under alot of stress (This doesn't bother me anymore though) before they put me in special classes, after which I think I generally had an easier time learning and felt less anxiety.

So no, I don't think merging classes is a good idea because I REALLY NEEDED IT THE WAY THINGS WERE. I also took alot of shit from bitchy regular-ed teachers for being the way I am and I wasn't even a bad kid.
 
The Special Ed at my school consists of kids with diseases like muscular dystrophy who can't speak, walk, or read anything more than basic words. Why they are in school wasting money that could be going towards kids who could actually get an education is beyond me.

Other than that, there is a small class (7 or so people) who go to a special teacher to learn certain subjects instead of the teachers that the other kids go to. They go to normal classes other than those.
 
The Special Ed at my school consists of kids with diseases like muscular dystrophy who can't speak, walk, or read anything more than basic words. Why they are in school wasting money that could be going towards kids who could actually get an education is beyond me.

Agreeing with this statement in particular. If somebody is so incredibly handicapped that there is no hope for them to do anything for society; then what's the point in wasting resources for them to dick around in a classroom? Not to sound mean, but I think there are a lot of bleeding hearts out there that cannot stand the idea that their child will never be able to do anything but grunt, and try to push them academically anyways.
 
For the Special Ed students, I think that they should be in seperate classes. In my experience, If someone has different needs than someone else, they need to be taught differently.

As for advanced education (We call it GT in my district) It doesn't work very well, mainly because the teachers tell us were great, then teach us the exact same way as the standerd education.
 
Agreeing with this statement in particular. If somebody is so incredibly handicapped that there is no hope for them to do anything for society; then what's the point in wasting resources for them to dick around in a classroom? Not to sound mean, but I think there are a lot of bleeding hearts out there that cannot stand the idea that their child will never be able to do anything but grunt, and try to push them academically anyways.
Either way, they will need to be cared for somewhere. It might as well be at a school.

Have a nice day.
 
I'm a secondary education major and have taken a class about Special Education.

There is a continuum of services for students with special needs; each student is placed in his or her Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). A student's LRE depends on his or her ability to benefit from the services provided to them. The most ideal LRE is the general education classroom. It is widely believed students with special needs will benefit the most when they are immersed in an environment where they can see how other students perform socially and academically. It needs to be stressed that a LRE does not maximize the student's potential. The process of incorporating individuals with special needs into a general education setting is known as normalization. However, this setting is not always the LRE for a particular student (especially those with multiple disabilities).

After the general education classroom you have itinerant services: a specially trained teacher comes to the general education classroom regularly to help the regular teacher and the child with special needs. After that, the child may be sent to a resource room for a few hours per day/few days per week where a teacher will work one-on-one with the student. If a resource room does not fit the child's needs, he or she may be sent to a separate classroom. If his or her disabilities are too much for a regular education setting to handle, he or she is sent to a special school. Usually these schools focus on vocational and group-living skills.

As Deck Knight mentioned in the OP, each student who receives special education services has an Individualized Education Program (IEP). This program not only outlines what resources a student will need (these are generally very pricy; a large portion of our nation's education budget goes toward special education) but also what goals (both academic and social) a student aims to meet and what methods of assessment the teacher will use to evaluate student success. Teachers work with parents to develop an IEP. A major goal of many IEPs is self-determination (the ability of an individual to make decisions regarding his or her own life).

Another problem a few of the people in this thread have expressed concern over is the inability of regular education teachers to attend to the needs of special education students. Some teachers begin teaching without any education/special education credits from an accredited university. These teachers are ill-equipped to handle regular education students let alone any problems presented by special education students. Nothing can really be done to address this problem except requiring more education before teachers are hired. I know a lot of teachers are pursuing master's degrees in education and a lot of education programs require classes in special education before awarding teachers with their degrees. Hopefully this helps alleviate the problem somewhat.

Regarding NastyJungle's post about the exclusion of severely handicapped individuals from the classroom: special education litigation has always been rocky; many parents campaign for their students to be educated in special environments while just as many campaign for their children to be educated in a general education classroom. According to IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) enacted in the 1970s, every child with a disability has the right to a free, appropriate education. It is impossible to tell if a child is benefiting from his or her education when he or she is incapable of speech. Perhaps the child understands what is happening around him or her but cannot express his or her thoughts. That is the main problem regarding inclusion of severely handicapped individuals. You cannot deny a student an education on the basis of an assumption.

The goal of normalization is to integrate those individuals with special needs into society as much as possible. With a growing number of individuals being diagnosed with disabilities or handicaps, it is important that this problem is addressed. Many IEPs include transition programs from secondary education to higher education or work programs. Such programs generally focus on supervised employment opportunities.

That being said, I volunteer at The Susan Gray School which is a preschool that focuses on inclusion of children with special needs in a regular education classroom. From first hand experience I can say that these children (my experience is primarily with Down Syndrome) do benefit socially from being surrounded by regularly developing peers. While their academic progress may be stunted, that is not the only goal of the education system.
 
In my Elementary School (Grammer or Primary School as many people call it) had different classes for Regular and Special Education. When I was in 1st grade, I was actually in the special education class.

The special education class at my elementary school was mainly for students who had mental disorders, and some physical disorders (students confined to wheelchairs, students with serious speech impediments, and etcetera)

To be honest, it felt like a normal class to me. They're just as normal as "regular education" students are. At times, I felt that the separation of Special and Regular education classes unecessary, but at other times, I felt that it was needed because they learn at different rates. Also, my class had Physical Therapy class about once a week. The "normal" kids (I really hate using this word, but I can't describe it in any other way) were allowed to participate as well, and we all found it fun.

My parents, as many of you might expect, were not happy with this. They, along with the parents of the "normal" children were displeased that we were in the special education class. I'm guessing this was mainly due to a fear of "special education" students, and perhaps even a slower learning rate (not that you learn anything in 1st grade anyway)

Interestingly, all the black students in my school were placed in the special education class. They were "normal" as well, and the chances of all the black students being randomly placed (or was it random?) in the class is pretty low. Also, they reported me to the teacher for not believing in God (Public School, not private).
Very interesting experience. I look foward to reading more posts.
 
Excellent responses so far (save herpderp TIK :| ).

Here's what I've integrated so far:

Class sizes/levels:

The college environment at Bryant was tailored to the 20-30 student per class model. I gained invaluable experiences in those classes simply because there was more individualized attention, you could hear the teachers better, and generally there was less potential for distraction.

The fundamental goals of class structuring should be to maintain the best student/teacher ratio possible while still providing, at minimum, an education suitable for operation in the real world. Separating classes by function are helpful in that they accomplish these goals, provided the lowest level is adequate. Upper levels would be focused more on achievement and excellence.

Special Ed gets a little dicey depending on function. I think a mixed approach is helpful, the problem comes in implementation. You only have a certain number of teachers, and they can only teach one class at one time. Personally I think the entire system would benefit if they focused less on having teaching credentials and offered the positions to say retirees or independent business people. That would increase the number of teachers with minimal cost, assuming it provided only say a stipend for gasoline or was entirely volunteer.

My biggest focus is on expanding the tools available to the school system. There is a constant fight over resources and compensation, and it's usually the students who suffer the most because all these decisions are made outside their knowledge. You need to foster an environment of excellence in order to produce the best students.

I was particularly intrigued by a proposal at the School Committee meeting with a summer program focused on vocational/technical training. Too often the trades, the experience of work, gets discounted for the theoretical income value of a four year degree. Well, my degree is pretty much collecting dust since I'm the ultimate generalist, so I have the debt without the big bucks job. If you work out of high school but our education was geared towards excellence, when you do go to college you'll have a little more seed money for your student loans. I don't think college is for everyone, at least not everyone between the ages of 17-20.

Inclusion/integration:

Ideally each class could be shifted to have an inclusion segment and a standard segment, shifting on different days of the week. It is important to have some exposure of one to the other because once the special ed students get out into the real world, they'll be spending dramatically more time with the regularly abled. Depending on functionality, it could be either beneficial or harmful. but the limited exposure would at least give some sort of glance into the life of the other students.

This would be difficult to achieve at all class levels though, as the idea behind an excellence/achievement class grouping compared to a normal grouping is to optimize the pace of learning. The system itself would be difficult given ordinary resources, but if it were possible to have "adjuncts" from retirees/independents as outlined above I think there would be a lot more flexibility. You would obviously want the people with the most relevant education managing the Special Ed classes and programs. In general the idea of expanding the teacher base from the local community comes from the idea that experience is the best teacher. You obviously have to CORI check everyone, interview, anything else you'd have to do to get any job that involves children. Mostly the idea is about expanding the flexibility so that those who really only need some basic training in class management can handle regular classes, and for those students who are truly needy someone well versed in their specific educational issues can devote more of their expertise.

It's a thorny issue and always will be. The problem is that Special Education students can live anywhere, but experts in the necessary skills are much more difficult to come by. Education should focus to the best extent possible on individualizing results. Students with certain disabilities need more life skills/group living training, most normal students should graduate with proficiency is all basic subjects, and for those students who excel they should be given greater opportunities to push themselves. The only way I see of meeting this ideal is maximizing the local resources available not only in money but in residential talent. The closer the school is to the community, the more everyone involved will have the student's interests at heart.
 
Regarding NastyJungle's post about the exclusion of severely handicapped individuals from the classroom: special education litigation has always been rocky; many parents campaign for their students to be educated in special environments while just as many campaign for their children to be educated in a general education classroom. According to IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) enacted in the 1970s, every child with a disability has the right to a free, appropriate education. It is impossible to tell if a child is benefiting from his or her education when he or she is incapable of speech. Perhaps the child understands what is happening around him or her but cannot express his or her thoughts. That is the main problem regarding inclusion of severely handicapped individuals. You cannot deny a student an education on the basis of an assumption.

True enough, I suppose! Different viewpoints can be enlightening. When you put it that way, you're probably right.

I still wonder if there could possibly be something that can be free but still more beneficial than a classroom, however.
 
Our school has a special ed program in which the students are highly separated from the rest of the school, at least in the way of classes. I personally find this to be better for them, as they really need a lot more one-on-one than other students, and lumping them in with the regular students would either hamper the teaching process or exclude the special ed students, a lose-lose situation. I find the separated system is better for both kinds of student, at least in the case of my own school.
 
I think that just having one general classroom for everyone to learn at the same pace is a stupid idea. The kids who require remedial education will just fall behind, and the more advanced kids will get bored and be held back because the teacher needs to cater to people who learn at a more average pace. While it may be beneficial socially for the remedial kids to interact with the "normal" kids, having them in the same classrooms for every class isn't the way to do it.

Personally, I think the model my old high school used was a pretty good one:

In my high school, there was a lot of separation of students based on ability level. We had AP, Honors, regular classes, and special ed classes, and the level of class they were placed in could vary by subject (so a single student could be placed in Honors English, remedial algebra, and AP history, for example). Teachers of each subject gave recommendations on where students should be placed in their subject for the next semester, and in general these recommendations had to be followed, but they could be overridden if the parent or student felt strongly enough, and the student could change levels during the year if the teacher that year felt as though the student should move up or if anyone thought the student should move down.

In general, this system worked really well, because it allowed students to be educated at whatever pace they needed in each subject, so if a student required remedial education in English but was really advanced at math, he or she could be placed accordingly.

I think that that's the way it should be: everyone should be able to learn more or less at their own pace in each subject. If someone requires "special education" in one or more (or even all) of his or her classes, so be it-- people learn at different paces, and so they should be placed in classes where they can learn most effectively, which means being placed in classes that are taught at their own pace. Just having one general classroom for all subjects is a bad idea, since the advanced kids will get bored and the remedial kids will have trouble keeping up. This problem will be present no matter how much you split things up based on level, but at least it will be less pronounced the more you split things by level.

The important thing is to also have some mixing of all levels of kids. Lunch and recess should definitely be all-inclusive, as should electives like art and music. That way, everyone gets to know each other. And having placement assigned for each individual academic subject also helps facilitate mixture of students.
 
I'm hugely in favour of streaming. Most of the schools I've gone to have had streaming in some way or another, but it was never really successful, or it got canceled after a month: random shit. In high school I took IB courses, and even then the difference between students was surprising: half of us did jack shit for the whole year, kept talking in class, and pissing off the duller kids all the time. Sometimes I'd just ask to leave the class a bit to walk around.

This is not a good use of my time, or anyone else's time in the classroom. The smarter kids being present does not in any way help or encourage those who simply do not get the material. Disrupting class, walking out of class, and the like does not help me learn whatsoever.

I'm pretty sure that this would apply to the other end of the scale as well: if people simply do not understand material, they should not be sitting feeling stupid for however long the class is; they need to be asking questions and getting the answers they need (the questions, could often distract in a normal stream class.)

As for application to special ed classrooms, if the student is intelligent enough to succeed one of the classes, then they should be placed in one of them. If they are still able to grasp the ideas in a class, then they may simply need extra time, or a special teacher or other accommodations.

However, I think a considerable amount of special needs students do not fit the above criteria. In that case I think an alternate classroom is best. It would be too much of a drain on a teacher to put them into a regular class, it would not benefit the students of that class, and the student would not learn all that much anyway. If socialisation is the issue, then there is still plenty of time at lunch, breaks, before/after school, and depending on the student, possibly non-core classes (arts, phys ed., etc). I do not think these should be segregated unless the student is actually a danger to the rest of the student body.
 
I was in a gifted and talented program in Years 5 and 6 (it was a composite class). We had to take a special exam in Year 4 to qualify for the class, and then I transferred schools to be part of the class. We were integrated in the school with everything except the classes. They were the two best years of my schooling, even though I still didn't quite fit in (I was expecting a class full of nerds and I was way nerdier than most other kids... in fact, about four of us were later separated from the others, put in a special table, and given extension work). I flourished because I felt I was finally stimulated and the teacher had been teaching the class for a long time, so she understood the needs of the kids whom she was teaching. At my old school, the teachers had despaired about what to do with me other than get me to help the other students, so I was put in Year 6 math lessons and reading lessons in Year 3, and then I sat around rather bored the rest of the time. The extreme boredom was grating (I ended up depressed about feeling 'caged' in high school... I don't want to brag, since it's more because the classes were aimed at the million struggling students and I was just left to my own devices because anyone who was remotely competent was a genius at that school -_-) and I felt that I was underfulfilling my potential, which is why I resorted to self-teaching and bringing books to school.

The good thing about the gifted class is that it was more or less voluntary; I suppose parents could bully their children into taking the exam and joining, but nobody could really complain they were isolated and made a big deal of if that didn't happen. The class was mostly full of people from that school for some reason (I don't know why, maybe students from other schools didn't apply because they'd have to transfer?), so nobody was really separated from their friends, and those that were, well, that can happen in primary school anyway, when everyone gets put in different classes; they still met up during breaks and sport and such. So socially I didn't feel like there was a real problem for anyone (I just sucked socially, but I had a friend outside the class as well). My primary educational concern was challenging myself anyway.

I attended some pretty crappy rural public schools, underfunded, breaking down, etc. Plus I don't know what it is with this town but most of the kids were apathetic (I know that is normal in school but there is a pervasive apathy in my town to everything) and struggled with everything. My English teacher in high school basically told me there wasn't anything she could do for me because I was the odd one out in a class full of students of low literacy and no interest. She said it bothered her that there was a child who actively wanted to learn and push the limits of the curriculum, but because of medical problems (AND EXTREME BOREDOM... boredom is not conducive to getting your work done unless there's an incentive like 'finish all this up and we'll start giving you more interesting work') was hardly getting my normal work done so extension work was out of the question, even if it wasn't such a huge drain on her, and there was nothing else she could do. In the end I was enrolled in university in early-entry English classes. I hated studying in English, later dropped out of high school because I was bullied constantly and was sick of transferring, and transferred to Computer Science.

But yeah. If you're in a class full of kids who can barely string a few sentences together and you can, well, just be grateful you're literate, 'cause you ain't getting much more, was basically what I was told. =/

Regarding class sizes: the gifted class had 30 children, which I personally thought was way too many, and I honestly believe the teacher thought so too. However most of us were pretty competent and used to being independent, so the class size didn't have such an impact on our learning as it had had on the normal classes I'd been in before (and in high school). Speaking of independence, on my report cards the teachers always wrote that they'd wish I'd ask for help more, but I always thought that was rubbish because I didn't need help with the work and they were always so busy with the students that did need help that I'd be sitting there for a long while if I wanted any. :|

At my school, we had a separate Special Ed. program. I don't know much about it except the students weren't separated from the rest of the children during breaks because I had a friend in that class. I was a special needs child because of my neurological and physical problems, so on excursions, they'd be encouraged to go and I tended to get roomed with them because nobody wanted to room with me and my friends were all in other grades, and also so the teachers could 'keep an eye on me'. During things like sports, they'd play with us too, and the ones who needed an aide were allocated one, although the problem with that is it's hard to fund aides for each special needs person. I was fortunate enough to have an aide during my major school trip in Year 10 (seventeen days).

Because I was a special needs student and struggled with a lot of things like organising myself, holding a pencil right, keeping track of my belongings, dressing myself correctly etc. (though I've improved massively since then and function fine in these things except the pencil... in fact I'm a good deal more organised than a lot of people I know), some teachers made certain assumptions about my capabilities. They were wrong. It was frustrating because I needed help in a lot of practical things, like life skills and getting around, but oftentimes I was denied it because I was seen as too high-functioning (they told my mom a lot I was 'so smart' that I didn't need it).

By the way, I skipped a year, and since I am born late in the school year, I was 1-2 years younger than everyone else in my class. I was extremely emotionally immature so they refused to accelerate me further because of my social difficulties. I was always bothered by this but I guess they had a point, since I was fine with adults but struggled with my peers.

tl;dr for the years I was streamed I flourished academically and the rest of the time I was miserable. I often suffered from lack of individualised attention and consideration (as a special needs student on 'both ends of the spectrum' as I was described by one teacher), but a lot of students do. The problem is you can't magic up expert personnel and pay them at schools like these.
 
If socialisation is the issue, then there is still plenty of time at lunch, breaks, before/after school, and depending on the student, possibly non-core classes (arts, phys ed., etc). I do not think these should be segregated unless the student is actually a danger to the rest of the student body.

As I am a theatre major I'd like to share what I know on special education through the arts.

First mixing Special Ed students and ESL students in drama classes has been a mixed bag from my view. It has often frustrated me that these students can be shoved into these classes on the assumption that they are easy and it will benefit them.

The structure of many of my high school drama scenes involved our own creations, and often had a script that was ever evolving based on new ideas. Being high schoolers the scenes could be very speech heavy.

For some special education students this doesn't work well for them. Those who cannot communicate effectively would have a hard time in this environment.

The head of my high school drama department also helps with the special education class in doing their own play. They did a Little Mermaid thing with cloth oceans and fish puppets. When I asked for the key to his success my reply was "a lot of practice and a very rigid schedule". There was a much more dedicated plan, and veering from it was not in their interest. A pattern had to be made.

There are exceptional cases however. In my final year we were performing a modern Greek play, one of our (very few) female Greek cast member had a younger brother who was in the special education program. The play was practiced after school and he often stayed to watch.

We had been working on a wedding dance scene a few days before, and us non-greeks couldn't get the dance moves just right. As luck would have it this kid was astoundingly skilled at the dance. Our teacher took a chance and added him in the one dance scene and it was wonderful. I ended up learning all my Greek dance moves from this guy
 
Back
Top