Examining I.D.E.A and N.C.L.B. Act

Examining I.D.E.A and N.C.L.B. Act

Name of Student

Name of Institution

Abstract

This paper examines controversy concerning various inclusions and mainstreaming programs in public schools. The paper will also asses the extent to which individuals with disabilities are responded to in school programs in the spirit of application of the No Child Left Behind Act. By so doing, the paper will consider and review the Individual with Disability Education (IDEA) Act , No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in comparison and contrast with the normal school program.

Introduction

For quite some time, there have been cases of some teachers developing varied attitudes the inclusion of children with learning disabilities in their mainstream classes. This research will therefore assess such cases through an in-depth study of some of the reasons that could have prompted such teachers to act in such a manner that is very unprofessional. In order to fully understand the pertinent issues behind this phenomenon, it is of utmost importance to review some of the previous works that attempt to address issues about mainstream education.

While appreciating the importance of Education For All under No Child Left Behind, it will be also of great importance to concentrate this research on the sphere of public schools. It should be noted that the major purpose of this research will be to unveil the controversies that exist about various opinions about mainstream education. Perhaps it would be wise to note that the major bone of contention has been about, what psychologist would have a divide opinion about, whether to include a child with disability in a class of normal learners or not.

Literature Review

Studies have been found to suggest that different teachers have different interpretation on what mainstream learning should entail. Studies have shown that some teachers are of the opinion that the kind of training they received cannot allow them to work with special needs learners (Rose, 2001 &Winter, 2006). These groups of teachers who hold this opinion suggest that the kind of training a teacher receives is what will ultimately decide whether such a teacher is well qualified to handle special needs learners. They therefore are of the contrary opinion in as pertains to the inclusion of special needs learners on the mainstream education system. This were findings of research carried out in Scotland to determine the attitude of teachers on including children with learning disabilities in normal classrooms.

Although the study found out that there exists a wide range of attitudes, results demonstrated that majority of the teachers favored the inclusion. The study also found out that professional attitude was the dominant factor in either facilitating the inclusion or on the other hand, hinder the inclusion altogether. Professional attitudes, the research had found, could actually impede the implementation of policies professionally perceived as controversial (Hastings and Oakford, 2003). The study asserts that it is the teachers’ attitudes that will eventually lead to the successful inclusion of children in the mainstream classrooms.

It is also worth noting that the study found out that teacher training was another vital element in dealing with inclusion of children with special needs into the mainstream classes. The study also found out that teachers were of the opinion that more knowledge about how to handle this category of learners (special needs) should be incorporated during teacher trainings (Avramidis et al, 2000, Garner, 2000 & Audit Commission, 2002).

Another study, Gauging Growth: How to judge. No Child Left Behind (Fuller, Wright, Gesicki &Kang, 2007) found out that the education policy of No Child Left Behind was in dire need of accountability. Center for Education Policy (2007) reported that test scores were improving, a clear indicator that the No Child Left Behind Policy was actually working for the benefit of every one. The same study reported that states that conducted accountability programs were the ones that registered improvement on the highest side (Carnoy and Loeb, 2002 and Lee & Wong, 2004).

Similarly, other researches have found out that while applying the policy of No Child Left Behind, there is the likelihood of science based subjects suffering a blow (Hake, 2005 and Cavenaugh, 2005). Hake believes that NCLB (No Child Left Behind) will inly promote direct instruction in sciences. Yet still other studies have focused on the financial part of implementing the NCLB in addressing the controversies of mainstream class management with regard to meeting the goals of education.

Likewise, studies by Duncombe, Lukemeyer and Yinger (2006) found out that the Federal Government has placed strict penalties for states in implementing the NCLB policy but with limited funding. It thus becomes a big tussle for institutions to implement other programs outside the mainstream education. Studies have also found out that since NCLB is explicit about assessment measures, states have an incentive to set low proficiency levels and to backload the required proficiency improvements over a long period of time (Kim and Sunderman, 204 and Ryan, 2003).

Materials and Methods

In carrying out a research about the controversies surrounding inclusion of children with learning disability, I opted to use secondary data from previous researches so as to facilitate quick access to reliable information. This was especially so given that there was limited time available for the research. Since the research has to address not only the controversies surrounding inclusion of children with learning disabilities into mainstream classes, there was need to assess the position of various stakeholders such as government, teachers and educational policies that eventually affect the way education is administered. There was need to assess the situation even beyond the American education system for comparison purposes and to get the interpretation of various scholars on such sensitive educational matters.

Results

One striking findings from the literature review is that there was an expression of a need by professionals that governments should back up their policy adoption with relevant trainings or in service. Those interviewed during the study expressed mixed opinions as pertains to the inclusion of special needs children into mainstream classes. Although the studies indicate that most of the interviewee teachers did not oppose the inclusion in its totality, they nevertheless expressed concerns about being consulted as the stake holders.

From the study carried out in Scotland, the research found out that teachers have varied opinion about how to handle learners with learning disabilities. The study had found out that there was a lacking consultative process before adopting policies. The study reveals that most teachers are opposed to being asked to play a role they lack direct expertise on. Findings from this survey indicate that teachers prefer being trained specifically to handle cases that call for special education if they have to assist in implementing such a program within the mainstream classes.

Some educational experts however observed that government policies could at time be too stringent to be kept up with, making some state controlled schools especially in the US to reconsider their education policies so as to be at par with federal government policies. This was a study on the US government’s policy of No Child Left Behind. Results indicate that the policy remained only as vibrant and highly successful as it was administered with accountability. Findings from this research did indicate that although the policy has seen several states improve from their former positions in terms if overall performance, those that performed exceedingly better were those states that had enacted or set on motion mans of accountability. Even in the face of strict application of NCLB policy, such states continued to register very good performance.

An assessment of mean scale score during the mean scale sores in fourth grade reading and mathematics under the long term National Assessment of Education Progress trends indicate that there was considerable upward trend as from the period between 1999 and 2004. The mean scale score of mathematics and reading for the years 1994, 1996,1999, and 2004 were 231,211; 231, 212; 232, 212; and 241, 219 respectively.

Graph of Mean Scale Scores In Fourth Grade Mathematics And Reading From 1994 To 2004

EMBED MSGraph.Chart.8 s

Source: NAEP, 2006

By the same extension, survey by Hake predicted that the sciences are headed towards a position where teachers will have to change the usual approach employed in teaching sciences. This is because the policy of NCLB and inclusion of children with disability into mainstream classroom would require that instructors break down concepts further so that everyone is accommodated and none is left. For subjects like science where leaners are supposed to synthesize information from leads given by their teachers, learners remain at risk of being spoon fed given that they share lessons with others who may not be fast learners as they may be. Teachers may be forced to explain nearly everything, leaving them with little to challenge their creative minds.

Discussion

Having seen the various positions of educational stake holders with regard to the controversies surrounding the inclusion of IDEA into the mainstream education, many scholars have found through research that the NCLB Act influences the approach taken by educators. While there is need to appreciate the diverse opinions held by various personalities and scholars, there is also a need to harmonize these divergent opinions. The fact that education has been liberalized and decentralized down to states should not be a hindering factor towards harmonizing ideas that would yield a workable solution.

In order to achieve this goal, there seems to be a need to align IDEA with NCLB. This calls for a highly specialized training of special education teachers so that they can be highly qualified to professionally handle their duties (Whitehurst, 2002). Indeed the US Congress had passes that there is a need for having a well-prepared teacher in special education classrooms. Such teachers must have teacher certification to teach special education. They should also demonstrate that they are highly competent in the core academic subjects that they teach.

In order to ascertain this, state education system may have state examination approved by the state that a special education teacher should first of all pass before being certified to teach. Besides, there is also a need to carry out a statewide assessment of learners with disabilities. Most importantly, institutions should base the services they offer and the programs run for students with disabilities on peer reviewed researches.

For accountability, states should come up with state approve standards that are clear to the students as well as to the teachers. They teachers should know the objectives of the state education and relate them to the No Child Left Behind policy so that state achievement in education matches the federal aims and policy as pertains to standards of education. Yell, Drasgow and Lowrey (2005) observe that the major purpose of having state-defined standard is actually to provide appropriate guidelines to teachers, parents and school. They assert that these guidelines inform schools, teachers and parents of what achievement will be expected of all students.

Recommendations

Dealing with students with special needs requires a careful approach that involves analysis of motivating factors for the behavior. Behaviorists recommend that owing to individual difference and sometimes psychological disorder, this is not the kind of group of learners that can be dealt with in a prescribed way. Each of their situations is unique in its own way and calls for its own way of dealing with it. I would therefore recommend that state systems of education should find a way in which teachers are well prepared for any uncertainties apart from just being trained on how to do the inside classroom teaching.

In cases where they share school compound with other normal learners, students with special needs always be under observation so that they do not cause harm to other third party learners. Their curriculum also ought to be flexible so that everyone’s needs are adequately addressed. I would also recommend that teachers who handle special education should be well motivated by the state system of education through salary incentives. In order to address various controversies in the system of education, I would recommend that policy making be made a consultative process that also involves collecting opinions of teachers and other stakeholders in the education system.

References

Audit Commission (2002). Special Educational Needs: A Mainstream Issue. Audit Commission, London.

Avramidis, E., Bayliss B., & Burden R (2000). Student Teachers’ Attitudes Towards The Inclusion Of Children With Special Educational Needs In The Ordinary School. Teaching and teacher education.

Duncombe, W., A. Lukemeyer, and J. Yinger.( 2003). Financing an Adequate Education: A Case Study of New York. In: W.J. Fowler, Jr. (ed.), Developments in School Finance: 2001-2002. (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics), pp. 127-154.

Garner, P. (2000). Pretzel only policy: Inclusion and the real world of initial teacher education. British Journal of Special Education. 27, 3, 111-115.

Hastings, R. & Oakford, S. (2003). Student teachers’ attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special needs. Educational Psychology. 23,

Kim, J., and G. S underman. (2004). Large Mandates and Limited Resources: State Response to the No Child Left Behind Act and Implications for Accountability. (Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project).

Rose, R. (2001). Primary school teacher perceptions of the conditions required to include pupils with special educational needs. Educational Review. 53, 2, 147-156.

Whitehurst, G. J. (2002). Evidence-based education. Retrieved December, 31st 2011, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/what works/eb/evidencebased.

Winter, E., (2006). Preparing new teachers for inclusive schools and classrooms. British Journal of Learning Support. 21, 2, 85-90.

Yell, M. L., Drasgow, E., & Lowrey, K. A. (2005). No Child Left Behind and students with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disorders, 20, 130-139.