Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Traditionally, children with low IQ who were unable to learn in a regular classroom were taught in a separate classroom with individual personalized programs for learning. Parents did not want their children in those classrooms unless they really needed to be there.
In the 1980s, it was decided that teaching those children in a separate classroom was a type of segregation that prevented them from interacting with children of their own age. The children were then integrated into classrooms with children with normal IQ levels.
The 1980s was also the onset of massive ADHD diagnosis in children and treatment with pharmaceuticals. Fast forward 40 years, and we have massive diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder.
I think that policy for what constitutes children with special education needs to be redefined. If 1/66 children has some form of autism, then autism is common and normal and there doesn't really need to be any special consideration for autism except in those situations where autism means a cognitive ability of, say, age 7. Autism used to be applied to children who could not speak or who could not advance beyond the cognitive abilities of a young child. Today, everyone wants to have autism, so children who seem completely normal have autism spectrum problems and thereby receive special attention at school.
Today, parents want their children to be identified as having a learning disorder because they believe their children will have smaller classroom sizes and more individualized learning. This is a problem that needs to be addressed, and it could result in schools not needing autism specialists.
I agee with this thinking. Its interesting how people are rather quick to embrace Gifted and Talented schools and magnets, Performing Arts schools etc, then cry segregation when the notion of separate schools and in most cases classes for special education comes up.
How is it not the same thing? Different classes/schools for kids with different abilities with different focus based on those abilities. Isn’t that the very definition of specialization? How would something that works for special kids on one end be ‘harmful’ to special kids on the other?
Also what defines special? If something is medically common it shouldn’t be treated as special. There’s a pretty wide range of normal. ADHD is officially common, Autism has become common. Common is the opposite of special. Ergo- Adhd and Autism diagnoses should not automatically equal special considerations or treatment or classes. Being on medication shouldn’t either. Can they function and learn along with others should be the question...and if the answer is yes, then that should be it. If not, there should be nothing wrong with them being in a classroom or school specially designed with their needs in mind.
There are private schools that specialize in educating kids that are ‘different’ or ‘special’ or whatever they call it these days. Many of them are at capacity and charge a premium for their services. They grow well rounded students that are confident and able and achieve to the best of their abilities. I have met some of these kids and they do not seem traumatized or marginalized because they attended special needs schools.
It seems to me the people who benefit most from mainstreaming are the parents who get to not deal with their child’s reality and for schools who get to not have to pay for separate classes and specialists etc. I struggle to see how it benefits the kids that are truly in need of a ‘special’ education.
Special schools have a bad history. But so do regular schools. A bad history however is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
IQ is not measured easily in children with autism, especially non-verbal children. However, many of these children have average to above average intelligence. They need to be taught differently, but that does not mean they need to be segregated into special classes. It depends on many factors.
Thanks for the link to Autism Spectrum Disorder today, which includes fully verbal children who need a little more time to, for example, process instructions or interpret information. This is exactly my point. In the 1980s and today, the many children who were/are like that can be included in the regular classroom and do not necessarily need any special education coaching. Today, they are "autistic" spectrum with normal IQ. Forty years ago they were "normal" spectrum with normal IQ.
I have to wonder whether it is better for those children to view themselves as part of the "normal children spectrum", or to grow up with a label of "autism spectrum disorder". I doubt there is any treatment for children who need more time to process and interpret information, so perhaps it's better for regular classroom teachers to simply provide additional explanation of information and task, as well as provide time for children to process the information. That's far more efficient than adding cost to education.
Teacher strikes are planned in more states in January if funding, pay and resources do not change by then. It is spreading.
Yes. To get back on topic... it's again happening in states that either don't have teacher unions, or what unions exist are pretty weak. It's not really driven by unions. It seems to be driven by grassroots movements among teachers on the ground.
There is way more to teaching some children that 1+1=2 than just knowing the answer. Additionally, the mandated paperwork alone would be a disqualifier for many of your potential bargain basement teachers.
So... you want someone teaching your junior high child algebra who struggles to do it themselves?Or, how about someone trying to teach your child of any age to write who neglects to use capitalization or even appropriate punctuation most of the time? Where I live clerks at Walmart and Aldi’s start at over 25 cents more an hour than teacher’s aides. This results in being forced to hire retail clerk rejects, other than mamas who want limited hours, as instructional aides and that will be your hiring pool for the actual teacher with your suggestion.
Are you really saying that you didn't understand junior high algebra and capitalization when you graduated from high school? Wow!
Nice shot at teachers aids. Calling them retail clerk rejects. Glad to know what you really think of them.
That is because in states with active unions teachers don’t qualify for food stamps - instead everyone complains they are overpaid.
In many states during and since the last recession teachers have received little to no pay increases of any type. Longevity raises were frozen and there were no cost-of-living raises, even after the rest of the US started improving and cost-of-living did increase significantly. There were a few states where they actually reduced pay and in quite a few they may have well as reduced pay because of changes to healthcare. West Virginia teachers’ take home pay decreased by $350 a month between last year and this year due to premium changes while their co-pays for medical care moved up to 40%.
Kentucky is not about current pay, it is about changes to their pension system. Unfortunately, the pension system does need changed, it is not sustainable, the question is the best way to go about it. A huge start would be to stop exempting themselves from Social Security.
I expect to see Arizona next, and rightfully so.
Exactly. Our teachers are not getting a retirement of any kind, wether it be pension or 401k. That along with dealing with our moron kids... it's not the first time they've not went to work.
Are you really saying that you didn't understand junior high algebra and capitalization when you graduated from high school? Wow!
I understood it, and although few people did it back in my day, I was educated in high school sufficiently enough to successfully navigate higher education. These days, based of the latest statistics, 69.2% of high school graduates immediately enrolled and attended at least a semester of college. Additionally, 59% of those who attend college will graduate. In other words, it’s not the norm so there has to be a reason they didn’t continue their education. So, yeah, I’m a little suspect of the academic attainment of those who don’t go beyond high school these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustralianBoy
Nice shot at teachers aids. Calling them retail clerk rejects. Glad to know what you really think of them.
In a location where the median household income is $98,514, and at least three retail stores are advertising retail clerk positions starting at $27,500, our teachers’ aides start at $15,250 (max out after 30 years at $32,800). Although there is only a 25 cents difference per hour in pay, the yearly income is limited because the hours are limited to 6 1/2 per day plus the number of days are restricted to only when kids are in school. The reality is, at least around here, being a teacher’s aide is a hobby job. Aides that are mothers looking for a little extra money or something to do while the kids are in school range from good to fabulous. Aides who are certified teachers looking for a foot in the door are generally good but we are seeing less of them and there has been a noticeable drop in quality now that the teacher glut has appeared to end. Aides who are there because they were seeking employment and it was the job they were able to get, I’m sorry, almost always have some noticeable flaws - including people who can not keep a retail clerk job.
Most schools very actively recruit aides from parent volunteers with good reason. Actually, they are fools if they don’t.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
"...wether (sic) it be pension or 401k. That along with dealing with our moron kids... it's not the first time they've not went (sic) to work..."
Yes, we certainly have a lot for which to thank our illustrious teachers! Like taking our moron kids off our hands for most of the day (and even feeding them free meals). Teachers have 457B pensions, actually, and if they PAID INTO SS, like the rest of us working stiffs have to, they'd have that, too (along with a lot less money in their pockets every paycheck). We also don't have the luxury of working a job during the summer to supplement our annual incomes -- or just enjoying life...
I think they have it pretty good considering what most bring to the table: not much (except those free tax-paid lunches).
But enough is never enough with them, it seems.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
