bigh0rt wrote:Mainstreaming is all the rage. And I can't say I'm against it. You toss this kid in a 'special school' now and he literally stands no chance at succeeding. Say what you will about schools designed to suit his needs, etc. etc. Bottom line is, you toss a 5 year old into a special school, he goes through his entire academic career in special schools, and he winds up contributing nothing as an adult because he is inadequately prepared. That is the harsh reality. I don't know what the mother claimed his special needs were, but trying to nip things in the bud, modify his behaviors, and keep him in a normal classroom setting increases the likelihood of success and him turning the corner.
Again, I don't know the full story, and I'll watch it tomorrow cause it's late now and I'm exhausted. But, I am certainly not for tossing 5 year olds into special schools, disabled or otherwise, unless it is something developmental to the point where they may be immobile (where there are specialists available to help get them mobile, if possible) or non-verbal (as public school staff are generally not certified sign language, and again, there are schools set up to meet these extreme needs). Keep in mind here that the ultimate goal, even with disabilities of this nature, is to get the child back into the mainstream. There are tons and tons of programs within the public school system designed to modify the school day to varying degrees for students who need it. He deserves the same education that is provided for students who aren't considered (either documented or parents' wacky accusations) disabled or special needs.
The mother said something about a form of autism.
Beats me as far as special schools go, but they seem to be popping up everywhere, along with stories about special needs children doing great things, so I thought they must be doing something right. Guess I'm misinformed there though, which is quite possible.
Question: Schools have taken the route of sending continued and repeat troublemakers to an alternative school for all of those troublemakers (at least in this area it's common practice). If "mainstream" is so important, then why is that a viable option as far as punishment goes? The reasoning behind it for the schools here is that the problems those children cause take time away from the other kids in the classroom and every minute of class time is very valuable. We've discussed how much stuff has to be squeezed into each school day as far as the cirriculum goes, and I've agreed that it's insane that so much ground has to be covered in such small amounts of time. So if a special needs child is taking away that same amount of time (or likely more), even though it's not by choice, at what point does the line have to be drawn in order for the rest of the class to get the "mainstream" education that is so very important? Why is it fair for the 16 kids in that class to get a substandard education because the teacher is too busy dealing with the special needs child?
There has to be a better alternative than giving 16 kids a substandard education simply because they were unlucky enough to have a special needs child in their class.
EDIT: And don't misunderstand, I believe the special needs children deserve the same education as anyone else, but if he/she needs extra help due to those special needs, why aren't there any good schools out there for these kids (since you said those schools are bad)?