Beyond Special Education: Toward a Quality System for All Students

1987 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 367-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Gartner ◽  
Dorothy Kerzner Lipsky

A review of a decade's experience with the implementation of PL 94-142 provides an opportunity to assess the process of providing education to students with handicapping conditions and to study the larger general education system. In addition, such a review offers an opportunity to examine changes in the place of persons with disabilities in American society. Alan Gartner and Dorothy Kerzner Lipsky find both the practice and conceptualization of a separate special education system wanting, and they propose a single system, special for all students.

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Winzer ◽  
Kas Mazurek

Article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) enshrouds inclusive schooling as a rights-based case premised on the placement of children and youth with disabilities in the general education system, highlights how inclusive schooling is to be implemented and guaranteed, and delineates the primary responsibilities of ratifying countries. This retrospective and descriptive paper touches on the genesis, drafting history, and content of the CRPD. The chief focus is on Article 24 and the articulated education goals and directives. The paper assesses the embedded conceptual and educational mismatches found in Article 24 that, of themselves, create obstacles to the implementation of the treaty’s education goals. We broadly conclude that regardless of the obligations incurred by ratification of the CRPD, the current emphasis on baseline rights to education, and the moral impetus provided by the international community, worldwide inclusive schooling is a fraught issue, under pressure on many dimensions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 258
Author(s):  
James M. Kauffman ◽  
Garry Hornby

The reasons are examined for the disparity between the inclusive vision espoused by Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the reality of the limited extent of inclusion in education systems worldwide. First, the leadership of key senior academics in the field of special education is considered to have been misguided in promoting a vision of full inclusion despite the lack of research evidence for the benefits of inclusive education over traditional special education provision. Second, attitudes toward and the treatment of people with disabilities have a long and complex history, and in this, many proponents of inclusion have been critical of 20th century special education. In particular, they claim that the sorting, labelling and categorizing required by special education have negative implications. Third, educators have been encouraged to imagine a system of education that is limitless, in the sense that all children with disabilities can be included in general education. This is because it is envisaged that general education classrooms will become so flexible that there will be no limits to the accommodation of students with disabilities, regardless of the nature or severity of their special educational needs. Fourth is the issue that deciding a student’s placement for education requires a judgment call and that, since human judgment is fallible, errors of judgment will always be made. Fifth, commitments to inclusion require that educators consider the practical, reality-based implications, whereas this has not been the case for many supporters of full inclusion. In conclusion, inclusion in the sense of students being physically present in general education classrooms is not considered as important as inclusion in the reality of being engaged in a program of instruction that is meaningful and challenging. Therefore, we consider that, rather than becoming extinct, special education needs to continue to be developed, disseminated and rigorously implemented in schools. Key special education strategies and approaches must co-exist with those from inclusive education, in order to provide effective education for all young people with special educational needs and disabilities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Л. М. Низова ◽  
К. С. Виногорова

The priorities and problems of the implementation of the national project “Education” at the level of a comprehensive school in the region are investigated. The factors of the origin of conflict zones and types of conflicts based on the analysis of contradictions of the opinions of scientists are revealed. The role of unity and struggle of opposites as a phenomenon of overcoming conflicts is determined. Based on the author’s monitoring of the education management system in the Mari El Republic, the positive and negative dynamics of the number of educational organizations studying in them and in the system of additional education over the past five years, the enrollment of students in specialized education, as well as the dynamics of participants in the regional and final stage of the All-Russian Olympiad of schoolchildren were revealed. Particular attention is paid to the study of the state of modernization of the regional system of general education in the framework of the national project, highlighting such priorities as computerization, replenishment of the school library stock, improving the quality of education and developing the personnel potential of the industry. According to the authors, the resolution of such problems as the creation of effective mechanisms for financing educational services in organizations with a weak social infrastructure, the availability of high-quality education, the low attractiveness of working conditions and the level of salaries of teachers, and others remain incomplete. To eliminate them, it is necessary to apply such measures as the further development of innovative forms of the education system, the strengthening of interdepartmental bodies and organizations to increase the educational needs of the population, the creation of a specialized financing system for the modernization of educational institutions, as well as the increase in the level of professionalism of teachers. Their actualization at the present stage contributes to the reduction of conflict zones in the education system.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 221-229
Author(s):  
B. Yu. Berzin ◽  
◽  
A. V. Maltsev ◽  
D. V. Shkurin ◽  
I. A. Shchipanova ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Nicole Sparapani ◽  
Vanessa P. Reinhardt ◽  
Jessica L. Hooker ◽  
Lindee Morgan ◽  
Christopher Schatschneider ◽  
...  

AbstractThis study examined how teachers and paraprofessionals in 126 kindergarten-second grade general and special education classrooms talked with their 194 students with autism, and further, how individual student characteristics in language, autism symptoms, and social abilities influenced this talk. Using systematic observational methods and factor analysis, we identified a unidimensional model of teacher language for general and special education classrooms yet observed differences between the settings, with more language observed in special education classrooms—much of which included directives and close-ended questions. Students’ receptive vocabulary explained a significant amount of variance in teacher language beyond its shared covariance with social impairment and problem behavior in general education classrooms but was non-significant within special education classrooms. Research implications are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document