Inclusion has been discussed on this blog in the past. I have looked at pluses and minuses in the system and while there are always issues in almost any government created program, the overall goal of the program is one that is too good to throw out.
Recently the outgoing head of the New Brunswick Teachers Association indicated that she felt that the funds used on inclusion could be better used elsewhere in the system. She also felt that disruptive incidents by special needs children made it hard for the other students in the class to apply themselves properly. Then she said that she intended to return to her position as a principal now that her term was up. That to me is incredibly troubling.
Inclusion works when the participants in the program are on board. If some of the participants are not in favour of the program it can create serious issues and those issues are a large part of what leads to the disruptive incidents in class. To put her back into the system as a principal is going to be damaging to any student with special needs that is a member of the school she is connected to because it is going to be one more person in the system that is going to be working against the program. What I would love to do is offer her the opportunity to see what Inclusion looks like when it is actually applied correctly. I would love to have Ms. Smith and Jody Carr (the minister of education and a strong Inclusion supporter) the opportunity to observe my son in his classroom, to see how he behaves, how his EA deals with him, how his class deals with him and how his teacher deals with him. Our son is a prime example of Inclusion working properly. But that was not always the case, Mr Carr in checking through his communication records is likely to be able to see a time when our son was having difficulties in a school where Inclusion was not working to the optimum and where our son was one of the disruptions Ms. Smith discusses. The differences after two years in the new school and in a system that is working well will show just how good Inclusion can be and how it is supposed to work.
Inclusion is a teamwork exercise. It requires the active participation of not only the EA, but also the entire resource department, the classroom teacher, the school administration and the parents. It requires that not only do all of these individuals be on board with the Inclusion process but it also requires that these parties all participate in active discussions on how to best make sure that not only is the child functioning well within the school system, but that all participants understand exactly where the line needs to be drawn. ie. does the child need to be removed from the classroom temporarily on an ongoing basis to help them cope with overstimulation. Does this need to be on a timed schedule or is the child functioning well enough that it can be done on an as needed basis.
Our son functions so well within his classroom because his EA is fully aware of his quirks and the signs of when he needs a break, he also functions so well because his teacher integrates him into the class for all normal presentations and activities even though he is essentially non verbal. He functions as well as he does because when he needs a break his EA is able to see the issue developing and remove him from the situation before it can become a problem for himself, his class or his teacher. And his class uses him as a benchmark and thrive on his accomplishments largely because with his behaviours being so well controlled by a great team, his marks and school work put him at or above the class average in almost all areas. All while being essentially non verbal and largely uncommunicative.
My son used to be a model of the broken aspects of the Inclusion program. Now he is a model of how it can really work.
The most important part of the inclusion, over and above the fact that he is learning at a greater rate then he would under the old segregated system, is the fact that his classmates are looking at him as an example of autism, they are seeing that he is different, but he is also the same and they are seeing that he is one of them. That is what the most important facet of inclusion is. Teaching the students of today that the discrimination that used to happen against special needs children is wrong and that we must never go back, because they are an important part of the our world and they have a lot to contribute to it.
Harold L Doherty says
Carl I am happy that the regular classroom has worked for your son. The Autism Society New Brunswick advocated during the MacKay and Ministerial Committee inclusion reviews for a continuum approach one which looked at what worked for each child in terms of both method of instruction and place of learning. The regular classroom did not work for my son. The reason it did not work was not a failure on our part as his parents. It was because he has severe autism & developmental delay and was overwhelmed in the regular classroom. He suffered meltdowns and came home each day with bite marks on his hands and wrists. The on scene educators recognized his needs and still do. He is well accommodated because he is outside a regular classroom receiving his instruction. Mr. Porter and other NBCLA activists working wtih government aim to eliminate alternate learning environments and force children like my son into the regular classroom.
The U of North Carolina TEACCH program has substantial recognized experience working with autistic children and that authority is in sync with the ASNB position in advocating for a continuum of services, a continuum which, according to the needs of the children involved provides settings for full, partial and even non inclusion in the regular classroom:
“Inclusion for Children with Autism: The TEACCH Position by TEACCH Staff
TEACCH’s position on inclusion of children with autism can be stated as follows:
The TEACCH program recognizes the important value of preparing all persons with autism for successful functioning within society. Each person with autism should be taught with the goal of successful functioning with as few restrictions as is possible.
Decisions about including children with autism into fully integrated settings must be made consistent with the principle of the “least restrictive environment” as a guiding principle. No person with autism should be unnecessarily or inappropriately denied access to meaningful educational activities. However, it should be noted that the concept of least restrictive environment requires that appropriate learning take place. Placement decisions also require that students be capable of meaningful learning and functioning within the setting selected.
Activities which are inclusive for children with autism should be offered based on an individual assessment of the child’s skills and abilities to function and participate in the setting. Inclusion activities are appropriate only when preceded by adequate assessment and pre-placement preparations including appropriate training. Inclusion activities typically need to be supported by professionals trained in autism who can provide assistance and objective evaluation of the appropriateness of the activity.
Inclusion should never replace a full continuum of service delivery, with different students with autism falling across the full spectrum. Full inclusion should be offered to all persons with autism who are capable of success in fully integrated settings. Partial inclusion is expected to be appropriate for other clients with autism. And special classes and schools should be retained as an option for those students with autism for whom these settings are the most meaningful and appropriate.”
The problem in NB is not inclusion itself … it is the insistence on full regular classroom inclusion for all students and the current plans to eliminate alternate learning arrangements in our schools, arrangements that would accommodate children such as my son for whom the regular classroom in not a safe, sanitary or positive learning environment. Make no mistake Gordon Porter is on record as stating that inclusion means all children in the regular classroom with kids their own age and he has tremendous influence in the current government. It is Mr. Porter’s “simple” (his word) view of inclusion as everybody in the mainstream classroom and his tremendous influence with the Alward government that is generating controversy.
Respectfully,
Harold L Doherty
Carl Bainbridge says
Actually Harold, our son is on a much more flexible system. He is not out of the classroom, but he is also not tied to it. In the past when there were difficulties or he exhibited signs of being overwhelmed he was temporarily removed to a quiet space to work and then brought back to work with the rest when he was up to it again. That is the system that properly works.
I do agree that some of the preachers of Inclusion to push to much for dumping them in the classroom and making them tough it out and that is not what works, not for anyone. They need to be integrated and removed as the individual need applies.
Personally, I have always felt that the classroom should be the ideal and that a secondary base of operations be available as the situation dictates. In our case this is working well and the results are showing.
Harold L Doherty says
It is the system that properly works for your son Carl and that is great. ASNB advocated for a range of placement options including the approach which has worked with your son. There are others for whom an arrangement outside the classroom is necessary. That is what has worked for my son. Both options should be available. That has been the ASNB position. That is the position of other advocacy groups like the Learning Disabilities Association of Canada and of autism authorities like the TEACCH branch of the UNC, a world recognized autism education authority.
facebook-aktie.de says
691169 777777I likewise conceive thus, perfectly written post! . 923662