Are Special Ed Students treated too Special?

It is without question that students with special needs may not be excluded from school based upon their handicap. However, the safety of other students may be at stake in some situations regarding students who are emotionally or behaviorally disturbed.

There was a specific situation that occurred in my classroom that put both regular ed students and a student who had an IEP for a learning disability as risk. With out anyone's knowledge, one of my IEP students had brought a cigarette lighter to school. During one of my classes, he flicked the lighter on under another students arm. I saw the flash of light, and immediately knew what he had done. I looked at him and asked him to go to his administrator's office and stay there until I came down at the end of the period. I also had a paraprofessional in my room (because of the number of special ed students in the room this period) and I asked him to walk the student to his administrator and tell the administrator what had happened. The para as well as most of the students in the classroom did not see the incident. Previous to this, the student had never had a problem in my class or any of his classes this year. He stated that he was not aware that a lighter was a weapon and now realized he should not have brought it to school. The student was suspended from my class for 3 days and given in school suspension and several after school detentions. If this had been a regular education student, I feel the consequences would have been much more severe, but he was protected by his classification.

Based on this situation and others, It is my opinion that special education students who are emotionally or behaviorally disturbed should be placed in a classroom where there is constant supervision and low teacher to student ratio's. These students need to be reminded of school rules and acceptable behavior more often than traditional regular education students.

Multicultural Classrooms

When researching the topic of multiculturism a in today’s society, educators are able to find many resources, which deal with the topic of appropriate practices in a multicultural classroom. Daily, educators deal with the many faces of diversity in the classroom. Each student’s ethnic background, race, gender, socio-economic status, sexual preference, age and religion need to be considered when developing a curriculum, classroom rules and procedures, and during the evaluation of students. These differences also need to be taken into account when dealing with the difference of opinions and conflict in the classroom.

According to Ramsey (2000, p171), “all students experience a course differently based on their race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and other group identities. As a result, students from different cultural groups will frame a course, conceptualize ideas, respond to ideas, relate to discussions and class exercises, and expect different things from a course.” It is imperative that educators are aware of these differences and respond to these differences appropriately, in order to facilitate learning and critical thinking in every classroom. Educators must be always on alert as to the perceptions of course material and why a particular student may be addressing an issue or topic in a different way than expected. By addressing this issue, students are less apt to become isolated in their individual thoughts and ideas. A universal goal for each classroom should be to escape the ethnocentric ideas and attitudes, which will in turn allow students to become respecting, accepting and tolerant of each other.

As an educator begins to facilitate an attitude of acceptance in the classroom, a set of goals should be adopted and implemented by the educator. Ramsey (2000, p172) has stated that instructional goals may include “(a) to acknowledge and celebrate cultural differences; (b) to increase students’ awareness of and comfort with their own and others’ cultural identifications; (c) to show students how ethnocentrism, or the tendency to view their own way of doing things as the only or right way of doing things, is often culturally exclusionary and prejudicial; (d) to help students understand the relationship between ethnocentric thinking and power.” In addition to educational goals, Ramsey (2000) further encourages and states the necessity for multicultural classroom rules. Suggested “ground rules include requiring students to (a) respect others’ opinions and confidences during classroom disclosures, (b) permit others to finish their statements before responding, (c) avoid personal criticism and ‘put downs’ of other student’s reactions or position they do not share, and (d) commit to understanding the latter from the cultural worldview, or contextual framework, of the speaker” (Ramsey, 2000, p175). Educators are aware of the necessity for rules in the classroom for every age group and/or class. By stating expectations up front to students, educators are able to model appropriate attitudes and respect for all differences in each individual student. Through modeling, students will display acceptable behaviors in the classroom, which should be continued as students enter society.

Educators must also address their own personal feelings, thoughts and issues in regard to multiculturalism, before attempting to implement this type of curriculum. Educators must not hold preconceived or “actual barriers to education by figuring [out]… who is potentially educable and who is not” (Nelson-Barber & Harrison, 1996, p262). A new educator should seek additional professional development and mentoring during this transition stage of implementation.

When incorporating a multicultural curriculum into the classroom, De Melendez & Ostertag (1997) suggest an approach that would occur in stages. New educators are encouraged to explore the first stages as they gain experience teaching in a diverse multicultural classroom. “Approach I: Teaching the Exceptional and the Culturally Different” includes teaching to the needs of the individual students. These needs may include a language or disability barrier, or a low-achieving student (De Melendez & Ostertag, 1997, p193). “Approach II: The Human Relations Approach” promotes, directs and leads students “to a sense of unity, tolerance, and acceptance of social diversity within the existing framework of American society” (De Melendez & Ostertag, 1997, p195). Through this approach educators encourage the display of a positive attitude and relationships among all students. “Approach III: Single-Group Studies” focuses on “a particular cultural group or element of diversity [which] becomes the focus of study” (De Melendez & Ostertag, 1997, p.196). De Melendez & Ostertag (1997) caution the educator when selecting a topic for study. Educators are warned that, the topic should not be taken out of context. An appropriate topic should be used in order “to help the child develop a proactive awareness about social and cultural issues” (De Melendez & Ostertag, 1997, p198). Educators should use this opportunity in order to encourage the student’s awareness of cultures different from their own culture. “Approach IV: Multicultural Education … is based on the importance and value of cultural pluralism in American society … students are led to analyze social issues involving bias, prejudice, and racism” (De Melendez & Ostertag, 1997 p198). During this stage of multicultural education, it is noted that the educator may need to drastically alter and/or make additions to the current classroom curriculum. Finally, through this last approach, “Approach V: Education That is Multicultural and Social Reconstructionist” (De Melendez & Ostertag, 1997, p200), the educator expects students to make or attempt to make social changes in society in regard to current multicultural thinking. “Students become active participants in the elimination of social oppression” (De Melendez & Ostertag, 1997, p200). Through these suggested, progressive approaches, educators are able to guide students into becoming accepting, tolerant members of society.

As educators use the previously mentioned approaches or other multicultural education approaches in the classroom, it is important to remember “that there is no one way of seeing, experiencing, or defining the world” (Nelson-Barber & Harrison, 1996, p256). In addition, it is equally important for educators to not rely on one method of teaching. A variety of methods should be used and incorporated into the curriculum, which must include “methods for understanding and analyzing their texts, including note taking, discussion (both whole class and small group), dramatization, graphic response, and personal and critical writing” (Nelson-Barber & Harrison, 1996, p257). Once these issues are addressed, educators open up the opportunity for all students to encounter a “rich schooling experience” (Nelson-Barber & Harrison, 1996, p256).

De Melendez, W.R. & Ostertag, V. (1997). Teaching Young Children in Multicultural Classrooms: Issues, Concepts, and Strategies. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers.

Nelson-Barber, S. & Harrison, M. (1996). Bridging the Politics of Identity in a Multicultural Classroom. Theory into Practice 35(4). 256-264.

Ramsey, M. (2000). Monocultural Versus Multicultural Teaching: How to Practice What We Preach. Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education & Development 38(3). 170-184.

Why should students take fill in the blank tests?

Many articles concerning the topic of assessment of science students are available for educators. This assessment plan rational summarizes articles concerning this topic and the writer’s view of assessment in the science classroom. Most science classroom assessments include labs and pen & paper tests, which force students to routinely memorize information. The writer of this rational and the authors of the following articles feel it is important for science educators to realize that there are alternatives to rote memorization and students should remember concepts because they understand the principles behind the concept.

In the article “Assessing understanding in biology” by Mintzes, Wandersee & Novak (2001), the authors stress the importance of real world knowledge that is taught in the classroom. When students are taught knowledge that is applicable to their lives, they will see the world as interconnecting and retain the knowledge they have learned in the classroom. In the past, science students have learned material through memorization, which was quickly forgotten once the student passed the test or exam. Today, educators must be aware of this negative form of learning and stress the importance of bringing meaningful science knowledge into the student’s lives in a way in which the student will remember and apply the learned material.

“Portfolio Assessment” and “Written Products” are encouraged by Mintzes, Wandersee & Novak (2001). Written assignments and laboratory work should be included in the measurement of student’s success in the classroom. Through these assessments, educators are able to determine if students are thinking critically and applying knowledge learned in the classroom to their lives.

During traditional pencil and paper exams, Airasian states, the goal of assessment should be “to provide pupils a fair opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned from the instruction provided” (2001). With this goal in mind, and achieved by the educator, the testing of students should be a positive experience for both the test-taker and the test-giver. Therefore, it is appropriate to test student’s knowledge of unit material in this fashion.

In many situations, alternative assessment instruments should be utilized. These instruments may include, but are not limited to, performance assessment and/or portfolio assessment. During these assessments, students would be required to demonstrate a particular activity or produce a range of products. These materials are graded by the teacher through observation and rating the student’s performance or product. Alternative assessment instruments “can provide some pupils who do poorly on selection-type tests an opportunity to show their achievement in alternative ways” (Airasian).

In addition, educators should also consider the many additional suggestions concerning assessment practices given by Mintzes, Wandersee & Novak. These include “reduce reliance on testing methods that reward and reinforce rote learning of verbal knowledge … begin to imbed assessment efforts seamlessly into the instructional program …focus assessment efforts on student constructed work products … make special provision for assessing the efforts of students who have special talents and those who excel in learning through non-verbal modalities … avoid one-shot assessment techniques … [and] consider the use of collaborative or co-operative assessment methods” (2001).

As educators develop assessment rubrics, it is important to be fair so each student will be assessed in the same way. Katz, Earl & Olson (2001) describes the many roles educators play when assessing students. One role is the mentor as the educator is reflecting the progress of students during group or individual activities. A second role is the guide as the educator reflects on the entire group’s progress and compares the student to the group’s progress.

According to Howard Gardner, students have multiple intelligences and educators must be aware of these intelligences, which include: Linguistic, Logical, Bodily, Spatial, Musical, Interpersonal, and Intrapersonal (SwopNet.com) during the assessment process. Gardner suggests that we encourage and support students who do not excel in the "traditional" intelligences (Koch, 1996). Educators should assist students with successful interactions between peers and adults and assist students to excel in areas in which they are successful (Koch, 1996). We should also be aware of educational values placed on students by their ethnic backgrounds (Koch, 1996).

As educators use the previously mentioned approaches or other approaches during student assessment, it is important to remember “that there is no one-way of seeing, experiencing, or defining the world” (Nelson-Barber & Harrison, 1996). In addition, it is equally important for educators to not rely on one method of teaching or assessment. A variety of methods should be used and incorporated into the curriculum, which must include “methods for understanding and analyzing their texts, including note taking, discussion (both whole class and small group), dramatization, graphic response, and personal and critical writing” (Nelson-Barber & Harrison, 1996). Once these issues are addressed, educators open up the opportunity for all students to encounter a “rich schooling experience” (Nelson-Barber & Harrison, 1996).

References:

Airasian, P.W. (2001). Classroom Assessment: Concepts & Applications (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Katz, S., Earl, L. & Olson, D. (2001). The paradox of classroom assessment: a challenge for the 21st century. McGill Journal of Education 36(1).13-26.

Koch, C. (1996). Interview: Howard Gardner, The Bright Stuff. Retrieved Feb. 9, 2001. World Wide Web: http://www.cio.com/archive/031596_qa.html

Mintzes, J.J, Wandersee, J.H., and Novak, J.D. (2001). Assessing understanding in biology. Journal of Biological Education 35(3). 118-24.

Nelson-Barber, S. & Harrison, M. (1996). Bridging the Politics of Identity in a Multicultural Classroom. Theory into Practice 35(4). 256-264.

SwopNet.com. Howard Gardner's Seven Types of Intelligence. Retrieved Feb. 9, 2001. World Wide Web: http://www.swopnet.com/ed/TAG/7_Intelligences.html