_L/48x48-e-mail.png)
Mainstreaming, Early Intervention, Psycho Educational Assessment
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Mainstreaming in the context of education is a term that refers to the practice of educating students with special needs in regular classes during specific time periods based on their skills.[1] This means special education is delivered outside the regular classroom, where the student with the special need leaves the regular classroom to attend smaller, and more intensive instructional sessions. Schools that practice mainstreaming believe that special needs students "belong" to the special education environment.[2]
Proponents of both mainstreaming and inclusion assert that educating children with disabilities alongside their non-disabled peers fosters understanding and tolerance, better preparing students of all abilities to function in the world beyond school.[3]
Advantages
Benefits to students with disabilities: It is believed that educating children with disabilities alongside their non-disabled peers facilitates access to the general curriculum for children with disabilities. Studies show that students with disabilities who are mainstreamed have:
- Higher academic achievement: Mainstreaming has shown to be more academically effective than exclusion practices.[4] For instance, The National Research Center on Learning Disabilities found that graduation rates of all students with disabilities in the U.S. increased by 14% from 1984 to 1997, although this report does not differentiate between students enrolled in mainstreaming, inclusive, or segregated programs.[5]
- Higher self-esteem: By being included in a regular-paced education setting, students with disabilities have shown to be more confident and display qualities of raised self-efficacy. All students in California who went to a different school prior to attending a mainstreaming program were asked to fill out an assessment of their old school as compared to inclusion program. The assessments showed that out of all students with disabilities 96% felt they were more confident, 3% thought they had the same experience as an excluded student, and 1% felt they had less self-esteem. Overall, students felt that they were equal to their peers and felt that they should not be treated any differently.[6]
- Better social skills: Any kind of inclusion practice, including mainstreaming, allows students with disabilities to learn social skills through observation, gain a better understanding of the world around them, and become a part of the “regular” community. Mainstreaming is particularly beneficial for children with autism. By interacting with same-aged “normal” children, children with autism were observed to be six times more likely to engage in social relations outside of the classroom.[7] Because children with autism spectrum disorders have severely restricted interests and abnormalities in communication and social interaction,[8] the increased interaction with typical children may be beneficial to them. The same 1999 study showed that students with Down’s syndrome were three times more likely to communicate with other people.
Benefits to non-disabled students: Many people believe that educating non-disabled students and students with disabilities together creates an atmosphere of understanding and tolerance that better prepares students of all abilities to function in the world beyond school. Students without disabilities who engaged in an inclusive physical education program reported increases in self-concept, tolerance, self worth, and a better understanding of other people.[9] The students also reported that the inclusion program was important because it prepared them to deal with disability in their own lives.[10] Positive aspects that come from inclusion are often attributed to contact theory.[11] Contact theory asserts that frequent, meaningful, and pleasant interactions between people with differences tend to produce changes in attitude.[12]
Disadvantages
Although mainstreaming in education has been shown to provide benefits, there are also disadvantages to the system.
Social issues: Compared to fully included students with disabilities, those who are mainstreamed for only certain classes or certain times may feel conspicuous or socially rejected by their classmates. They may become targets for bullying. Mainstreamed students may feel embarrassed by the additional services they receive in a regular classroom, such as an aide to help with written work or to help the student manage behaviors. Some students with disabilities may feel more comfortable in an environment where most students are working at the same level or with the same supports.
Costs: Schools are required to provide special education services but may not be given additional financial resources. The per-student cost of special education is high. The U.S.'s 2005 Special Education Expenditures Program (SEEP) indicates that the cost per student in special education ranges from a low of $10,558 for students with learning disabilities to a high of $20,095 for students with multiple disabilities. The average cost per pupil for a regular education with no special education services is $6,556. Therefore, the average expenditure for students with learning disabilities is 1.6 times that of a general education student. However, the cost of mainstreaming a student is generally much less than the cost of keeping that student in a special classroom.
Harm to non-disabled students' academic education: One potentially serious disadvantage to mainstreaming, although one that can be mitigated with proper resources, is that a mainstreamed student may require much more attention from the teacher than non-disabled students in a general class. Time and attention may thus be taken away from the rest of the class to meet the needs of a single student with special needs. The effect that a mainstreamed student has on the whole class depends strongly on the particular disabilities in question and the resources available for support. In many cases, this problem can be mitigated by placing an aide in the classroom to assist the student with special needs, although this raises the costs associated with educating this child.[13]
Some parents also fear that general education standards will be lowered to the level of the least able students.
Harm to advanced students' academic education: It can be difficult or even impossible to simultaneously accommodate students with significant intellectual disabilities while also adequately challenging very advanced students. Beyond the lost opportunities to learn advanced academic skills, gifted students are typically bored by or even angry about being subjected to the constant repetition of basic skills which the least able students require. Many advanced students in mainstreaming classes are drafted as informal, unpaid tutors for classmates with academic deficits and often resent this imposition on their time and energy.[citation needed] Advanced students will also lose the opportunity to develop persistence on difficult tasks, because they are never faced with tasks which they find difficult. In some cases, this situation will lead to classroom disruption, behavioral problems, and an inflated sense of self-importance.
Harm to students with disabilities' academic education: Parents fear that general education teachers do not have the training and skills to accommodate special needs students in a general education classroom setting. However, professional training and supportive services can usually address these concerns.
Careful attention must be given as well to combinations of students with disabilities in a mainstreamed classroom. For example, a student with conduct disorder may not combine well with a student with autism, while putting many children with dyslexia in the same class may prove to be particularly efficient.
Early Childhood Intervention is a support system for children with developmental delays and/or disabilities and their families.
If a child experiences a developmental delay, this can compound over time. The principle of early intervention is to provide appropriate therapies for children with disabilities, to minimize these delays and maximize their chances of reaching normal milestones in development.
Early intervention begins from birth or first diagnosis, and continues until age 3. It involves specialised education and therapy services for the child, as well as support for the whole family through information, advocacy, and emotional support.
History
Early Childhood Intervention came about as a natural progression from Special Education for children with disabilities. Research during the sixties and seventies showed that the earlier children received Special Education, the better their outcomes; it also showed that families who were supported earlier were more empowered to advocate for their child later on (Guralnik, 1997). Many Early Childhood Intervention support services began as research units in universities (e.g. Syracuse University, USA; Macquarie University, Australia) while others were developed out of organisations helping older children.
In the past it has been simply called “early intervention”, however this term is also used in other fields such as mental health, referring to adolescents, and from the nineties most organisations outside the U.S. changed the term to “Early Childhood Intervention” to reflect the age-group. In the U.S., however, "early intervention" is used. In some instances, it is used to refer only to services for children birth to age 3 (Spiker, Hebbeler, Wagner, Cameto, & McKenna, 2000), but in other instances it is used to refer to a wider range of early childhood. The Journal of Early Intervention, for example, covers birth to age 8.
Definition
“Early Intervention is best conceptualized as a system designed to support family patterns of interaction that best promote children’s development” (Michael Guralnick, 1997).
Early Childhood Intervention has several goals. Firstly, it is provided to support families to support their children’s development. Secondly, it is to promote children’s development in key domains such as communication or mobility. Thirdly, it is to promote children’s coping confidence, and finally it is to prevent the emergence of future problems. (Sheila Wolfendale, 1997).
How is Early Childhood Intervention provided?
“These services are to be provided in the child’s natural setting, preferably at a local level, with a family-oriented and multi-dimensional team approach” (European Agency for Development in Special Needs). Robin McWilliam (2003) [1] has developed a model that emphasizes five components: understanding the family ecology through ecomaps; functional needs assessment through a Routines-Based Interview; transdisciplinary service delivery through the use of a primary service provider; support-based home visits through the Vanderbilt Home Visit Script; and collaborative consultation to child care through individualized intervention within routines.
Early Childhood Intervention may be provided within a centre-based program (such as Headstart in the USA), a home-based program (such as Portage in the UK), or a mixed program (such as Lifestart in Australia). Some programs are funded entirely by the government, while others are charitable or fee-paying, or a combination of these.
An Early Childhood Intervention team generally consists of Teachers with Special Education training, Speech and Language pathologists, Physiotherapists, Occupational therapists, and other support staff such as music therapists, teacher aides, and counsellors. A key feature of Early Childhood Intervention is the “transdisciplinary model”, where staff members discuss and work on goals even when they are outside their discipline.
“In a transdisciplinary team the roles are not fixed. Decisions are made by professionals collaborating at a primary level. The boundaries between disciplines are deliberately blurred to employ a “targeted eclectic flexibility” (Pagliano, 1999).
Goals are chosen by the families through the annual or biannual IFSP (Individual Family Service Plan), which evolves from a meeting where families and staff members talk together about current concerns, as well as celebrating achievements.
Psychoeducational assessment
provides estimates of the client’s intellectu-
al, or cognitive, abilities and educational achievement levels. It also yields
recommendations relevant for educational planning. Sources of assess-
ment data include background information, educational history, and
records and data from tests of intelligence and educational achievement
and, at times, ratings tests of attention, behavior/emotions, and adaptive
behavior. Psychoeducational assessment is designed to answer these ques-
tions: Does the client have a learning disability(ies)? Mental retardation?
Attentional problems? What are the client’s academic and cognitive abili-
ties, strengths, and weaknesses? What are appropriate educational recom-
mendations? Accommodations? While learning, not emotional problems,
is the focus of psychoeducational assessment, behavior/emotional and
medical issues may need to be addressed in psychoeducational assess-
ment. Compiling, integrating, and analyzing all assessment data yield
educational and other relevant recommendations.
Though the formats of psychoeducational reports vary, most assess-
ments include certain basic components.A psychoeducational report is a
type of psychological report that focuses on assessment and interpreta-
tion of educationally related psychological tests and educational tests,
including tests of intelligence and cognitive abilities, achievement tests,
and tests of behavior and attention.
Posted byDoc Junhel at 3:35 PM
0 comments:
