Integrating Students with Special Needs in Regular School - Annotated Bibliography Example

Integrating students with special needs in regular schools (Name) (Institution) (Course) (Instructor’s Name) Date of submission Issue statement   This paper looks at a number of books and journal articles that discuss the issue of integration of special needs students in regular classrooms. First and foremost, when is a student considered disabled or has special needs? Hegarty and Alur (2002) say that special needs in students in the learning environment arise when they are hearing impaired, intellectually impaired, visually impaired, emotionally disturbed, behaviourally disordered or physically impaired. The authors say that the term ‘special needs students’ is more inclusive as it encompasses students who are considered a risk by school managements either in behaviour or academic performance. Styron, Maulding and Parker (2008) define integration as the process of treating all students, both regular and special needs students as peers in the classroom and giving them the same level of attention in order to make them feel equal. Hegarty and Alur (2002) simplify the term integration as a curricular concept meaning that all instruction should be embedded in a meaningful context and that isolated subject areas should be merged, so that students do not simply receive splinters of information but rather knowledge that creates a meaningful whole. Other authors use the term inclusion instead of integration to convey the same meaning (Subban & Sharma, 2006; Loreman 2007). The 1994 UNESCO conference in Salamanca recognised that integration was one of the best ways of reducing biased attitudes towards students with special needs in the learning environment (Subban & Sharma, 2006). Australia has followed the global pattern in integrating special needs students with regular students. However, Chen, Moran and Gardner (2003) as cited in Loreman, Forlin and Sharma (2007) observe that there remain segregated settings for students with severe intellectual disabilities, for autistic, deaf or blind students and for students with extreme behavioural problems. Therefore, there is need for effective criteria through which to support integration or campaign for segregation. These are guided by the success factors of integration, types of integration and their objectives, and advantages of integration over segregation. Annotated bibliography Objectives of integration Zigmind, N. (2005). “Searching for the most effective service delivery model for students with learning disabilities.” In Swanson, H., K. Harris, & S. Graham. Hand book of learning disabilities. New York: Gulford Press This 7th chapter of this book looks at the debate on inclusion and segregation in the US. The chapter explores and compares the result collected over the years presented to the congress, department of health, education and welfare from 1979. The data indicates that several decades ago, inclusion was automatic as there had not been developed models and methods with which to address the education of students with disabilities. Hover, after a number of studies, new models were developed to address the special needs of students with disabilities. Currently, there is debate to revert to the old model where disabled students are enrolled in regular classrooms. This chapter discuses the finding in the case of the US and offers an important learning lesson for the Australian case. Subban, P. & Sharma, M. (2006) Primary school teachers’ perceptions of inclusive education in Victoria, Australia. Journal of Special Education, 21(1) These authors of this paper are specialists in special education based at Monash University. This paper is one of many papers that they have authored to address the issue of students with special needs in schools. This paper in particular explores the perception of primary school teachers towards integration in Australia. They surveyed 122 primary school teachers and used two scales Attitudes Toward Inclusive Education Scale by Wilczenski 1992 and Concerns about Inclusive Education Scale by Sharma and Desai (2002) to assess how particular demographic factors and their attitudes toward and concerns towards integration affected the whole process. Their study showed that teachers who had undergone special training on special education were more open and receptive to integration than teachers who had not undergone the sae. Teachers who had experience with caring for disabled children in the family setting were more supportive of integration. However, majority of the teachers in the sample were receptive to integration on a gradual scale supported by a number of policies enacted by the Victoria state government (e.g. Blueprint for Government Schools in Victoria 2003) and that of the federal government through the Disability Discrimination Act of 1992 among others. This paper thus provides an important link between social integration and educational integration. It indicates that for educational integration to work, it must be supported by social integration at the family and community level and at the same time through legislation. Preparing regular students for integration Reiter, R. & T. Vitani. “The inclusion of Pupils with Autism: The effect of an intervention program on regular pupil burnout, attitude and quality of mediation.” Autism 11(4), 321-333 Reiter and Vitany are specialists in the field of education in Israel. They use a general approach in assessing the impact of integration of students with special needs into regular classrooms. They specifically address how regular students approach and response towards inclusion of autistic students in the regular classroom. Their studied inspired by past research such as by Ochs et al, (2001) which indicate that inclusion of special needs students into regular classroom brings with it a myriad of news issues that require special attention. They observe that treating special needs as normal ones may lead to ignoring their special needs. To further explore this issue, the authors conducted a study in an Israeli elementary school that sampled fourth grade class of 23 pupils, 12 boys and 11 girls aged 9-10, among them two children suffering from autism since their first grade. The research utilizes quantitative and qualitative methods to collected data. For quantitative data, they used a burnout questionnaire adopted from Friedman (1999). The questionnaires were filled out by regular students in that class and included fourteen items loosely categorized into lack of self-fulfillment, fatigue and depersonalization. Qualitative data was colleted through interviewing teachers and regular students in that class. This research indicates that inclusion of special needs students has a burnout effect on regular students. Their attitude towards curricula changes same as their attitude towards special needs students thereby having a negative effect across the spectrum. However in the initial stages, the authors note that special needs students tend to show more normal behavioral tendencies than in a segregated special needs class. This paper is helpful in this study as it points out the disadvantages and advantages of integration Preparing faculty and curriculum Styron, R., Maulding, W. & Parker, G. (2008). Preparing Administrators To Serve Diverse Populations Of Students With Learning Challenges. Journal of Diversity Management – First Quarter 2008 3(1), 55-66 This paper explores the diverse role played by school administrators in facilitating successful integration of students with special needs into mainstream classes. The authors indicate that the mere physical placement of special needs students in regular classrooms does not help meet the ain goal of integration which is equity is student achievement levels. They argue that there is need for “adaptations and modifications in existing teaching practices to meet the educational needs of students with disabilities, and administrators have the grave responsibility of ensuring that these students receive appropriate services” (p.55) The authors reiterate that all stakeholders in any integration process must be involved throughout the whole process. They add that “as a result of faculty, student, and practitioner involvement, the special education administration program will be a remarkable success” which also applies to any integration program that takes into consideration of all stakeholders. This article provides information on the necessities of any integration program. It indicates roles played by the faculty, administrators, students and the society in facilitating integration. Pros and cons of integration Mckinnon, D. & McLeod, S. (2007). “The prevalence of stuttering, voice, and speech-sound disorders in primary school students in Australia.” Language, speech, and hearing services in schools. 38(1), 5–15 This paper seeks to confirm some claims made by a number of authors over the teachers’ attitudes towards disability. In one of the researches conducted, teachers indicated to be more accommodative to minor disabilities such as stuttering and voice challenges. In this paper, the authors sought to verify some of these claims by sampling 10,425 voice challenged primary schools students in a number of regular schools in Australia. In their results, the levels of stuttering were compared across the grades. A highlight of their results indicates that the level of voice difficulties and stuttering reduced as from the lower grades to the higher ones. They conclude that, inclusion in the regular classes and with other students played a significant role in reducing this disability. This provides a strong point in support of integration as opposed to segregation of regular students and special need students. Preparing students Campbell, J. L. Gilmore & Cuskelly, M. (2003).“Changing student teachers’ attitudes towards disability and inclusion.” Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 28(4), 369–379 This paper uses a similar approach to that of Styron, Maulding and Parker (2008). They ague that physical placement of special needs students in regular classroom does not automatically bear desired results of integration. They add that the requirement by national and state educational authorities for inclusion of special needs students in regular classrooms does not guarantee its effective implementation and acceptance. Historically, regular student teachers who have not undergone special needs training have shown the greatest resistance to integration. Their attitude is also influenced by the level of disability they are required to accommodate in mainstream classes. The authors conducted a research to verify these views. They used questionnaires adapted form Wishart & Manning (1996) which were given out to 274 preservice education students, in one of the large Australian universities whereby the students filled them twice, at the beginning and end of semester. The questionnaires basically sought to fid out the stereotypical views regular students had on children with Down syndrome. There was high negative stereotyping at the beginning of the semester than at the end. Again, the number of students who supported integration increased towards the end of the semester. This paper underscores the necessity of training and preparing regular students for integration. Types of integration Yadav, M. (2008). Education of children with special needs. Sydney: Anmol Publications Yadav recognises four types of integration; physical, academic, social and societal. The author also recognises specific targets for successful full integration listed as: curriculum, teaching basic skills, class management, professional consultation and communication, teacher-parent-student relationships, inter student relationships, exceptional conditions, referral, individualised teaching and professional values. The book also offers specific issues to be catered for depending on the type and level of disability. The discussion of integration is incomplete without considering the different levels of integration which this book recognises and discusses in depth. This is imperative in the discussion of integration and realization of full integration. It complements the discussion of integration by other authors who recognises that integration can only be realized through a number of stages. By providing a description of each stage, the audience can asses the levels of integration existing in the Australian education system. Determination of disability consolidation Hegarty, S. & Alur, M. (2002). Education and children with special needs: from segregation to inclusion. Melbourne: Sage This book discusses the integration process in the US and the UK, two countries which share a lot in education. This book discusses the paths taken by these countries thereby offering a point of reference that is important in identifying the success or failure of Australia’s integration programs. The book wholesomely discusses integration against integration and deeply analyses the strengths and weaknesses of each option. The authors present their views precisely using simple language and terms. This book is a healthy reading for this course and paper as it provides insights into the discussion of segregation and inclusion through reviewing perceptions from special needs teachers, regular students’ teachers, disabled students, regular students and parents to the debate. Loreman, T., Forlin, C. & Sharma, U. (2007). “An International Comparison of Pre-service Teacher Attitudes towards Inclusive Education.” Disability Studies Quarterly 27(4), 45-56 This paper compares the Wilczenski scale to asses the differences in preservice teacher attitudes towards inclusive education across four different countries; Australia, Hong King, Canada and Singapore. The authors identify three major influences as: academic and physical, social, and behavioural. The research also examined the level of disability that the teachers were willing to accommodate in regular classrooms. This study is important in discussing the issue of integration in education as it explores how pres service teacher attitudes in particular approach the idea of reforming the curriculum in order to accommodate special needs students. To achieve this, the authors sampled 603 pre-service teachers preparing to teach in regular classrooms in the four countries. The study showed that preservice teachers were most concerned and accommodative to social concerns (e.g. shyness, verbal challenges) followed academic and physical needs. Across the countries, the teachers were least accommodative to students with behavioural needs. Terms of successful integration Loreman, T. (2007). “Seven pillars of support for inclusive education: Moving from ‘Why?’ to ‘How?’” International journal of whole schooling. 3(2), 22-38 In this paper, Loreman, an internationally renowned scholar in special education, conducts a literature review for the conditions necessary for the successful implementation of integration. He identifies “positive attitudes; supportive policy and leadership; school and classroom processes grounded in research-based practice; flexible curriculum and pedagogy; community involvement; meaningful reflection, and; necessary training and resources” (p. 22) as prerequisites for successful implementation of integration. The pillars discussed in this paper provide additional factors that the state and national government can enact in order to ensure achievement of education for all. He also makes it a appoint to differentiate the various levels from where some of these pillars are most applicable. This approach has been ignored by majority of the authors of discussion who prefer to treat special education uniformly from kindergarten to graduate school. Read More