Democracy Essay, Research Paper
Democracy by sheer definition is synonymous with equality. Therefore, the concept of mainstreaming fits perfectly in this scenario. Democracy comes from the Latin word demos meaning the ” the people,” not just one type of people, but all people. Mainstreaming children with disabilities into general classes should not be a privilege, but a common thing. Doing this in turn would instill a sense of acceptance and tolerance in the students, thereby reducing the amount of discrimination that a special educational student might be exposed to in future years. Democracy is alive and working well in the public school system. It is called mainstreaming.
The public school system has a duty to provide equal opportunities to all students. By the same token, mainstreaming allows that privilege to be extended to the children with disabilities. Mainstreaming is an extension of the idea of democracy in schools. Mainstreaming is the practice that allows handicapped children the most appropriate and effective educational experiences, which will enable them to become self-reliant adults.
By exposing students to children with disabilities, other children see that no one is “different” or should be treated differently due to superficial circumstances. Thusly, allowing for disabled children to get treated equally and fairly. This would instill a feeling of self-worth and boost self-confidence. Mainstreaming reinforces the values of patience, tolerance, and discourages discrimination. Also, by mainstreaming, a signal is sent out saying that all people are worthy of the same education and chances regardless of color, creed, or capability.
It is estimated that approximately 3% or 6.5 million individuals in the U.S. has mental retardation and Drew et al., 1996 feels that the institutions should be closed out to the people with retardation being returned to the community and home environments. Initially mainstreaming was intended for students with mild disabilities. A more current movement seeks to provide children with moderate to severe disabilities with similar opportunities. Public Law 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 was enacted and marked the beginning of a new era for learners of special needs. In 1990 this was amended and renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) and included the disabled between the ages of 3 and 21 (Gollinick, 178-179). This law offers states financial support to make a free and appropriate public education available to every child with disabilities at no cost to the parent. The professionals role is not to tell the families what decisions to make, but to advise them on how best to make it-to give counsel, information, and support where they are needed (Meisel, 8).
The local education authority (LEA) do the best they can to meet the special education needs (SENs) of children within the limits of their understanding of those needs and the budget available. Politicians make the SEN policy, however, the LEA can not make recommendations that will ultimately cost money they can not afford (Hall, 227). The law is clear that the LEA must serve a copy of the proposed statement within two weeks of the date on which the assessment of the SEN student was accomplished. This should be understandable and clear to the parent. An example of how the LEA gets around this as to cost is as follows (Hall, 247):
Tammy
Actual need Tammy has the need for constant one-to-one
support for all activities throughout the
school day because without this nothing can
be achieved.
Stated provision: Flexible staffing levels to meet her needs at any
particular time.
In reality, Tammy spent between 50-60 per cent of her day waiting for somebody
to do something for or with her because she had no means of communication and no voluntary movement and was totally blind. Without a dedicated support worker, much of her day was wasted just waiting. It is, therefore, clear that the LEA appears to be making provisions-which may never materialize. This leaves the SEN student and parents frustrated and angry. Parents have a right to appeal against the decision of their LEA to an independent Tribunal. If a student is not getting the help she/he needs, mainstreaming will be more difficult.
The IDEA was passed by Congress to assure that all children with disabilities receive a free, appropriate, public education, which emphasizes special education, and related services designed to meet their unique needs. At the present time, schools nationwide serve about 6% of students who are mentally retarded in primarily regular classrooms. An additional 20% are receiving services from a resource classroom (where the student spends time learning in a regular classroom and then to a separate special classroom). 72% of mentally retarded children are currently taught in restrictive settings. A large portion of these students are taught in separate classrooms while 10% still receive education in separate schools (http://www.thearc.org/).
Successful mainstreaming is especially dependent on positive attitudes by regular classroom teachers (RCTs). Levels of acceptance of handicapped children by RCTs have been discouraging. A survey of 200 teachers revealed that only 38% supported the concept of mainstreaming. Of that percent only 40.5% were willing to accept the mildly handicapped individual in their classrooms (Meisel, 119). It is when handicapped students are liked, accepted, and chosen as friends that mainstreaming becomes a positive influence on the lives of both handicapped and non handicapped students. Also providing handicapped students with access to and constructive interaction with non handicapped peers. Mainstreaming is not something to do for a few students, but, rather, something to do for all students. This may or may not work out. If non-handicapped students reject the handicapped, there may be increased prejudice (Reynolds, 26).
Only a very few children need to be educated in something other than the regular school environment: Boys and girls whose life/health situations is so fragile that moving them from residence to another place for schooling would endanger their lives. Mainstreaming has to do with educating children for all or part of the school day in the regular classroom with the regular curriculum, with students who have not been labeled handicapped. Some feel that mainstreaming means putting children back into regular classrooms, however, the main concept is not “putting children back”; but rather not removing children in the first place (Reynolds, 54).
I plan to teach elementary school and take a personal view and responsibility in handling this issue of segregation or integration. Is it wiser to segregate pupils of different levels of ability or to integrate them? A major argument in favor of segregated placement is that the handicapped students are more positive and have greater self-esteem when placed with other handicapped students. On the other hand, integration provides the handicapped child an opportunity to model non-handicapped peers and be motivated to imitate the behavior of these higher performing peers. I strongly agree that the schools should take a more active role in structuring their classrooms to accommodate the special education needs of students. These students should not be labeled and segregated, they should be integrated and have the same opportunities for learning and becoming a part of the mainstream.
In essence, all schools should be committed to valuing students of all kinds and include them in all aspects of school life regardless of the labels placed on them. A teacher’s job is to help students set realistic goals and identify which curriculum and instruction should be geared to meet those goals. Mainstreaming certainly comes with its benefits but the best place to help these children set meaningful goals and learn meaningful skills to function successfully, as future adults would be the community as a whole.
Including special education students in regular classrooms keeps them in the mainstream of education. Their assignments can be limited and they can receive supplemental instruction for material they have difficulty comprehending. In terms of democracy-they have the opportunity to receive the same education as all other students and by not removing them from regular education, they are not being treated differently. Some people see pull out a detrimental to these kids and others see it as a special treatment for them. Special ed kids offers a lot to regular classrooms. It is believed by some that kids need to learn of differences and tolerance early. In terms of students with learning disabilities-just because they have difficulty reading the textbook, doesn’t mean they will not learn the material through lecture, projects, etc. Usually, if the student is confident enough, they can keep up with the rest of the class with modifications made to reading material, assignments and tests. By including them in the regular ed classes there is equity in their education and diversity in the population of the classroom.
During the summer of 1998, I worked as a camp counselor at the Kendall Boys and Girls Club. This camp accepts all children whether they are white, black, Hispanic, or have a disability. Through the months at camp, I became attached to a little boy named Marty. Marty was one of the so-called “special kids” because he was deaf. Throughout the weeks, Marty and I became close and I got a chance to meet his family. I would talk to them about his condition and ask them what they do about his schooling. I just assumed that Marty went to a special school, but that was not the case.
Marty is being mainstreamed into a normal school. I asked his mother how well he was doing and if there were any problems. She said, “he is doing ok in school, struggles a little bit, but then what kid doesn’t.” She told me at the beginning that Marty was having social problems with the other children. He wasn’t fitting in and the kids were a little cruel to him. After a couple of weeks, the teacher decided to do a special lesson on “special students.” This helped the students understand Marty’s way of living and what he was going through.
Marty’s mother told me that the doctor said if he was taught to use sign language, more doors would be open to him. Marty does know some sign language, however, his mother discourages the use of it because she wants her child to be as normal as possible. Is this the right decision?
An example of parents’ anger at school policy was noted in an article in the Miami Herald April 18, 1999. Norland High is in a crisis as far as its educational program is involved. Dozens of students were enrolled in “at risk” remedial courses in September without their knowledge and without parental consent, a district requirement. The label and courses are reserved for students who administrators believe need extra help with their studies because of excessive absences, failing grades or behavioral problems. Larry Smith says his son was erroneously enrolled in a physical science class reserved for student’s at-risk. He was in the class for an entire semester without knowing it was a remedial course. Nor did his parents give permission for his being there. There’s a lack of consistency in the education program, which is “affecting the morale and achievement of the students,” said English teacher Josephine Mikus. The knowledge that some students were placed in remedial courses when they should have been enrolled in regular classes angered many parents.
Special education is everybody’s concern. The notion that there are two distinct sets of children, the disabled and the non-disabled, should be dispelled. Mainstreaming is a social experiment that continues to be most influenced by ideology and political and philosophical justifications. Mainstreaming remains an unproven educational panacea; there seems to be no true answer as to whether regular class or special class settings are superior for exceptional students. Mainstreaming is not a universal policy. Senator Tom Harkin notes that one state educates 90% of mentally retarded pupils in separate classes; another instructs only 27% separately (Winzer, 385). The trend toward mainstreaming is likely to continue. Why do parents chose mainstreaming? At the preschool level, they believe it is for the child’s sake, however, the parents may be operating under false assumptions about the benefits. Children who are mainstreamed into schools sometimes are faced with prejudices and discrimination.
Mainstreaming provides an opportunity for disadvantage children to function among their peers. Mainstreaming is not about having children with disabilities in class with everyone else, it is about doing the just and right thing in the name of democracy. Mainstreaming is about providing a fair education to all students who want to learn. Special education is now firmly established in American education; its evolution has been rooted essentially in the democratic idea of equal opportunity for all people. Therefore, democracy in schools is alive and well.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Gollinick, Donna M. and Chinn, Philip C. Multicultural Education in a Pluralistic et al.,
Society. Normalization and Mainstreaming. 5th Edition NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1998.
Drew et al, 1996. 178-179.
Hall, John T. Social Devaluation and Special Education: The Right to Full
Mainstream Inclusion and an Honest Statement. United Kingdom: Kingsley Pub.,
1997.
Meisel, C. Julius. Mainstreaming Handicapped Children: Outcomes, Controversies and
New Directions. NJ: Erlbaum Associates, 1986.
Mytien, Nguyen. “Mainstreaming Mildly Retarded Children.” The Arc of the U.S. a
National Organization on Mental Retardation. AOL:http://www,ematusov.com/cd170 (22 May 1997).
Reynolds, Maynard C. The Future of Mainstreaming: Next Steps in Teacher
Education. MN: CEC Publications,1982.
Walters, Sabrina. “No peace at Norland High.” The Miami Herald. 18th April 1999:
B1, B2.
Winzer, Margret A. The History of Special Education: From Isolation to Integration;
Part 3 Into the New Century. Wash., D.C.: Gallaudet Univ. Press, 1993.
THE SELF
CHAPTER 3
What Am I? The most difficult question in philosophy. Chapter 3-The Self-trys to deal with this question. It gives arguments for believing in the existence of the mind over the body and arguments for believing in the existence of the body over the mind. Can the mind and body be integrated to form a unified person? We must try to bridge the gulf between the mental and the physical tiers of a person. Am I a body that has a mind, a mind that has a body or something distinct that is associated with them? To be a person is to be something with both a mind and a body.
The oldest question of philosophy besides “What Am I?” is “What is Reality?” If we accept everything we see, then we have no unanswered question as to reality. But we still must deal with “What Am I?” Brahman is The Self, the immortal, the fearless. When one is sound asleep, composed, serene and knows no dream, that is the self. There are two terms that denotes The Self-Java and Atman. In Java it denotes the apparent self (not real), and in Atman it denotes the true self.
Every person has a biological life in so long as our organs function. Your life will go on but you also have a psychological life-the life of your mind. It is possible to have one without the other. Your bodily organs continue to function; however, if you were in a coma without the faintest glimmerings of consciousness, your psychological life would have ended. If death, in the sense that truly matters, were the end of my conscious life and not the cessation of my biological functions, then I would lose nothing of value just by losing my biological life. Given the choice between ordinary death and remaining for many years in a coma, there would be no rational basis for preferring the coma.
The first true dualist (someone who acknowledges the distinction between the mind and body, but argue that the two somehow comfortably fit together) was Plato. Before Plato the soul was conceived as physical (materialist), as air or breath, however, if this is correct, then is there life after death? Does God exist? Socrates and Plato argue that the soul is indeed immortal. At death it is released from the body and begins a journey to the underworld. There it remains until it is eventually reincarnated. Descartes in his Meditations reasons:
A thing which thinks. What is a thing which thinks? It is a thing which doubts, under- stands,(conceives), affirms, denies,
wills, refuses, which also imagines and feels. In other words,I am my mind.
His thoughts were that it was possible to be mistaken about the existence of my body but it is not possible to be mistaken about my existence, therefore, I am my mind and not my body, I have a body, but I am my mind. Descartes believed that the mind is an immaterial entity separate from the body, and separate from the thoughts and experiences associated with it. To have a mind is not just to have a conscious life; rather the mind is a mental entity, which has a conscious life, just as the body, is a physical entity, which has a biological life. To be a person is to be something with both a mind and a body.
According to Physicalism a person is a physical entity, however, the physicalist does not deny that a person has mental attributes; but he must concede “I might have a mind, but I am my body.”
Determination is defined as the thesis of universal causation: the principle that every event has a cause. Free will means we can choose to do good or evil. Whatever occurs is the necessary argument of the past. Example: Because of a drug introduced into your system you committed a murder, you were not free to act differently, therefore, you should not be held accountable for your actions. Because we are conscious, we believe we are free and that, with any choice we make, we might have acted differently; but this is an illusion. For every choice, there is a reason; therefore, we could not have acted differently.