by Ferretlover » Wed 08 Aug 2007, 23:06:25
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jack', '
')Anyway, this results in learning disabled children being placed in regular classrooms with non-learning disabled students. This particular practice is referred to as "mainstreaming". My contention (then and now) is that the bright and average students are shortchanged as a result of such a policy. Thus, the learning disabled child should not be included in regular classrooms. Furthermore, special education in general is a waste of resources.

Jack, this is a subject of which I have a great deal of knowledge. I have two sons-one with ADHD and one who taught himself to read before kindergarten & whose IQ test administered in the first grade with an IQ of 148. So, I worked for my kids, almost Always against every school district they were ever in.
My ADHD has had many psych tests, a couple of brain scans, and all kinds of therapy. I am not always comfortable with the ADHD diagnosis (I have thought part of his problem was that he was sporadically bi-polar), but he was never able to exert self-control. I did not like that he was mainstreamed, but many schools wanted it to have other kids learn how to act around handicapped students, and for the teachers to get experience in handling handicapped children. In one elementary, he was actually asked to be mainstreamed because he wasn't psychotic enough! If I had it to do over, I would have insisted that he never be mainstreamed. He couldn't keep up with the regular kids, and there had to be aides hired just to keep him on task (one aide I got fired because she was doing all his work for him!!). The other kids in his mainstream classes were held back somewhat waiting for the handicapped kids to catch up. (I once timed a day in my son's elementary school-of the 6 hr 30 minutes he was there, once you subtracted all the recesses, lunch 1/2 hour, going to and fro between the art, music, etc classes, he was in class 2 hours and 15 minutes!! And we wonder why they aren't learning anything!
As for my other son, I had to constantly argue with the teachers, principals and counselors because he was so bored in class-he was never challenged (this was before AP classes were so common). He finished up his junior and senior grades at a special AP high school here in MN.
So, basically what I am saying is that I agree with you-in part. IMHO, schools should be in session all year long, set up by learning abilities, NO graduating from any class until the students can pass with at least a B average (some might be in remedial reading but also in calculus). In other words, they may move ahead fairly quickly in some subjects, but be slower in others. They should not be moved through the grades just because of their chronilogical age. Classes should run all day 8 to 4 or 5, with any sports occuring After classes. (One of my husband's Univ profs has a theory that the reason young adults can't work more than 45 minutes to an hour without a break is due to the running around to get to other classes And because children watch so much TV & are used to having commercials break up the stream of what they are watching).