The Effects of Mainstreaming and Inclusion in Our Schools
The Effects of Mainstreaming and Inclusion in our Schools
Students with special needs are mainstreaming and inclusion into regular classrooms everyday in American schools across the country. The subject of mainstreaming and inclusion in the school system is often debated. Debates can become heated and both sides feel strongly about their views when deciding where students who are labeled as “special” should be placed. Children who start out in Special Education classes should be given the chance to mainstream into regular classrooms. Children with disabilities still have rights in school system regardless of their physical or mental capabilities. They are entitled to an education within the school system and can further our society. “Parents of nondisabled children often complain that their children are getting less attention as a result of mainstreaming and that the presence of students with disabilities for large portions of the day reduces levels of expectation and diminish excellence. Sometimes classroom teachers feel that they must work harder than the learning specialist; resulting in negative feelings…Mainstreaming seems to be working well in a number of school systems, although it also faces a good deal of criticism. Public acceptance is mixed” (Pulliam & Van Patten, 2007).
Mainstreaming means placing a child who has special needs into a regular classroom for a limited amounts of the time. This could be for one subject, or several subjects. The child must make the progress needed to perform in a regular classroom first, and earn the right to be placed there. Once they are able to function in a regular classroom setting, they are allowed access to a more normal standard of education. “Mainstreaming has been used to refer to the selective placement of special education students in one or more regular education classes. Proponents of mainstreaming generally assume that a student must earn his or her opportunity to be placed in regular classes
Students with special needs are mainstreaming and inclusion into regular classrooms everyday in American schools across the country. The subject of mainstreaming and inclusion in the school system is often debated. Debates can become heated and both sides feel strongly about their views when deciding where students who are labeled as “special” should be placed. Children who start out in Special Education classes should be given the chance to mainstream into regular classrooms. Children with disabilities still have rights in school system regardless of their physical or mental capabilities. They are entitled to an education within the school system and can further our society. “Parents of nondisabled children often complain that their children are getting less attention as a result of mainstreaming and that the presence of students with disabilities for large portions of the day reduces levels of expectation and diminish excellence. Sometimes classroom teachers feel that they must work harder than the learning specialist; resulting in negative feelings…Mainstreaming seems to be working well in a number of school systems, although it also faces a good deal of criticism. Public acceptance is mixed” (Pulliam & Van Patten, 2007).
Mainstreaming means placing a child who has special needs into a regular classroom for a limited amounts of the time. This could be for one subject, or several subjects. The child must make the progress needed to perform in a regular classroom first, and earn the right to be placed there. Once they are able to function in a regular classroom setting, they are allowed access to a more normal standard of education. “Mainstreaming has been used to refer to the selective placement of special education students in one or more regular education classes. Proponents of mainstreaming generally assume that a student must earn his or her opportunity to be placed in regular classes
Bibliography: 1. Blacher, J. (2005). Inclusion Confusion: Where does my child with high functioning autism belong? The Exceptional Parent, 35(9), 82-83 2. Donovan, D. (2010). Special Ed Parents want to keep separate classrooms. Daily Herald, 4. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1974323871). 3. Kavale, K.A. & Forness, S. R. (2000). History, rhetoric, and reality: Analysis of the Inclusion debate. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5), 279. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from Research Library. (Document ID: 60930048). 4. Leyser, Y. & Kirk, R. (2006). Not all Riders of the Education Express Debark at the Inclusion Station Research Library. (Document ID: 1011327831). 5. Looney, S. D. (2004). Education and the Legal System: A Guide to Understanding the Law. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. PEARSON/Merrill Prentice Hall Becomes a Divisive Issue in Md: [FINAL EDITION]. The Washington Post, p. B 01. Retrieved June 29, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand 7. Pulliam, J.D. & Van Patten, J.J. (2007). History of Education in America, (9th Edition). PEARSON/ Merrill Prentice Hill Retrieved June 29, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1192563131). 9. Stout, K. (2001). Special Education Inclusion. Retrieved July 12, 2010 from WEAC (Wisconsin Education Association Council) at http://www.weac.org. 10. Whittaker, J. (2006). Education: Opinion: Letters: Special needs debate. The Guardian, p 1079138141).