To begin, it seems almost
unacceptable that I have not read, or for that matter have seen a copy of this
document in my career. Once again, I believe this speaks to the fact that regular classroom/subject teachers are
usually not considered part of the special education program planning team. So
I was somewhat surprised when I read the section concerning the classroom
Teacher's Responsibility in the Statement
of Principles section Education Act Sections
26-38. The text clearly states that the classroom teacher is part of
program planning. I implement the program and I am responsible for the assessment,
but I have never been part of the actual planning. The program planning team
has helped me tremendously over the years, indeed where would any of us be, as regular classroom teachers, without
their constant support and guidance. Additionally, the document Section 2.3
Program Planning, requires the input of the teacher/s directly involved in
teaching the student. Since section Two includes the areas which concerns me
the most, I will examine some issues of importance here.
The
document also states that the special education student has the right to a
quality education taught by licensed qualified teachers. Having a teacher's
license and being qualified to teach special education are two very different
things, surely. If, as I am, teaching
students with special needs then does that necessarily mean that I am
qualified? This is the paradox of pedagogy...a teacher teaches students but
what does she teach and is she qualified to teach in that particular setting?
Special
education students also have the right to an inclusive education in so far as
it is possible and plausible for them to be placed "within grade level and
subject area possible." So while the definition of inclusive education is
succinct and commendable it is still somewhat exclusionary. I believe we still
have a long way to go before we arrive at true
inclusion. P.E.I. has surpassed the province
of Nova Scotia
On a positive note, I found the section of the
literature which made reference to the six graduated learning essentials very
encouraging . Students with special needs are expected to work toward the
attainment of these essentials, as well as all students. It is very similar to
Roger Slee's (2001) content organizing questions... philosophy of inclusive
education. It should be mandatory for the graduated learning essentials to be reviewed and discussed at the first staff
meeting of the year. It reminds all of us of the big picture. While it can be argued that teachers are doing these things, anyway...a little common sense
wouldn't hurt.
In Section 2.5 Appropriate Assessment is
outlined. The document claims that every effort is put forth to make the
interpretation of both formal and
informal assessment free of bias and further, bias-free assessment is
particularly important when schools are using assessments to make changes in
the program or in the implementation of supports. It is folly to suggest that
one can make a bias-free interpretation. Interpretation presupposes bias on
some level. There is no escaping bias.
The arrangement and language of
this lengthy document are concise, for the most part, and reader friendly.
Teachers and parents of special needs students would benefit greatly from an
annual review on this document essentially because it can encourage greater
understanding of procedure and practice, as well as more informed collaboration
all of which are most beneficial to the student.
 |
| Food for Thought |
No comments:
Post a Comment