Borgholio wrote:Simon, from a teacher's standpoint, how do you feel about the "No Child Left Behind" idea?
Leaving No Child Behind while Racing To The Top is self-contradictory and therefore stupid.
Students with learning disabilities (as distinct from
behavioral problems) should be taught in mainstream schools wherever possible, in intensive classes where necessary, but integrated with regular students where this can happen. Students with behavioral problems that cannot be controlled by positive or negative incentives OR medication need to be sent to schools capable of controlling their behavior well enough to permit them to learn, and which can isolate them from other children whose education may be harmed by their disruptive or dangerous behaviors.
Note that when I say "behavioral problem" I mean "this student's behavior is a problem." Not "they are a criminal" or "they are evil" or "they are crazy." Just "this student's behavior does, in point of fact, present a problem for the learning environment of other children.
Some behavioral problems are mental health issues. A LOT of kids have poorly managed issues related to mental health, because many parents are in denial or incompetent to make their children take their meds, the mental health issues tend to emerge unpredictably and are compounded by puberty, and because getting straight answers out of children as to why they do what they do is extremely difficult.
Other behavioral problems are just plain this particular kid being an asshole.
...
Now, NCLB never actually said this
shouldn't happen. NCLB basically said all states had to establish a high-stakes testing regimen and set unachievable targets for how many students would be passing those tests by 2015 or so. Waivers followed.
The biggest problem with NCLB is that it sets high demands for graduation rates and demands that we do high stakes testing, but does NOT provide extra resources to do so. Thus, there is a strong incentive to create dumb tests, then focus nearly all your energy teaching kids who are JUST BARELY smart enough to pass with coaching. Meanwhile, the kids for whom a dumb test is easy tend to get neglected. And the kids who are extremely marginal absorb large amounts of teacher energy and
are not placed appropriately in classes that teach to their current level of knowledge, so they never really learn anything other than the minimum set of factoids and procedures they cram so they can pass the test and scrape by with a D average.
Please note that I didn't say "has a disability." I said
dumb. The problem is not special ed kids. And the problem is not that schools don't know how to teach special ed kids. The problem is the specific kids, most of whom are NOT special ed, who are in fact
dumb. Stupid. Foolish. Other adjectives like 'lazy,' 'entitled,' 'insolent,' or 'unmotivated' also apply. None of these things are the same as "has a disability that justifies putting them in special education."
...
While noble in principle, students who are like Broom's co-worker would struggle to keep up with a class of "normal" children, but he would thrive if given special attention in a class that moves at his pace. With Bob, for example, he's doing great because everybody else is aware of his issue and helping him to overcome or get around it. But if he were simply treated like everybody else, he would quite likely fail.
I am 100% behind you on this.
Not asking because of anything you said, but this whole topic got me thinking. I've always felt that the No Child Left Behind concept was flawed and wanted to know what someone who has direct experience with it would think.
It is routine (indeed, legally mandated) that schools maintain special ed courses (typically intensive by certified SPED teachers, or 'co-taught' with two teachers per room) for anyone as disabled as Bob is implied to be.
No Child Left Behind did not alter that.
You may be thinking of 'mainstreaming,' which is simply the practice of integrating as many children with disabilities as possible into normal schools. This is actively a good idea because it encourages us to NOT stick all the weird kids in a 'loony bin' school that gets minimal funding and is chronically 'out of sight, out of mind.' It is also good for the development of the disabled children...
as long as the disabilities are not behavior problems.
Students with behavior problems need special handling, regardless of whether their problem stems from being mentally ill, developmentally disabled, or just plain a jackass.
