Just to let you know I’m not a teacher yet, but I’m currently interning in an EBD classroom.
Today, while interning I was struck by a comment that was made. It was said that a student, who has been in an EBD classroom for most of thier school years and has finally tested high enough to be transitioned into reg. ed., shouldn’t be moved. Huh? I thought our whole purpose was to help these kids transition back into reg. ed. I realize that some students will never be able to be completly transitioned but why hold back someone that has potential to succeed? It was said, though, that they feel the student will not be able to handle reg. ed., but shouldn’t we still try it? :?
[quote=”120101ps”]Just to let you know I’m not a teacher yet, but I’m currently interning in an EBD classroom.
Today, while interning I was struck by a comment that was made. It was said that a student, who has been in an EBD classroom for most of thier school years and has finally tested high enough to be transitioned into reg. ed., shouldn’t be moved. Huh? I thought our whole purpose was to help these kids transition back into reg. ed. I realize that some students will never be able to be completly transitioned but why hold back someone that has potential to succeed? It was said, though, that they feel the student will not be able to handle reg. ed., but shouldn’t we still try it? :?[/quote]
What a good question! The answer to it is rather long though. What test was the student given that was ‘high enough’ for them to leave EBD? And what should we trust more? The teachers that know this student and have worked with him/her or test scores?
Why take the human quality out of it? Why leave it to tests? Does the test know the tenor and rigor of the classes the student will find themself in? I bet the teachers do.
Test results should be used in decision-making but the decisions should be made by people - not by tests. Doctors use test results to make decisions about our medical care but doctors and patients make the decisions.
And also understand the real reason behind pushing kids out of spec. ed is political and financial. Spec. ed classrooms are smaller and therefore more expensive. Too many schools push kids out of spec. ed just to do things on the cheap.
And why is being in a regular classroom automatically assumed to be better? This student may get less attenion in those classrooms and will certainly be in a much larger classroom. That he can possibly function there doesn’t mean he can do well. Is it better to just barely get by or is it better to thrive?
And that’s the question that should be asked - where will this student be more likely to thrive in the coming year?