In any classroom a range of skills is to be expected.
Students, even if they are in a common grade, more often than not have
differing levels of performance. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but
simply a reality. As teachers we witness such reality day in and day out and
find that we must develop lesson plans in a way that comprehension is acquired by
all of our students. The struggle is usually finding a balance between
developing lessons that are too tough for the students who struggle more with
comprehension and making lessons that are not challenging enough for those who
struggle less. This struggle becomes even more complex when teaching in a class
within a class or CWC setting. What this means is that there are several
Special Ed students who are placed in a Regular Ed classroom.
There are some pros to the CWC movement
but there are also many, many flaws. Many seem to believe that the CWC
classroom setting can hurt more students than it helps. Due to IEP’s and accommodations
within them the range of levels teachers must prepare for is very widespread.
For instance, I am in a few class rooms where we have students being
recommended for honors beside students who cannot spell “free”. Because of this
we must try to tailor our lessons in a way that Student A benefits, while
ensuring that Student B is not left behind. With the proper training and
intentional placement of students in these CWC classes I believe this is fully
possible. However, the training regular education teachers are getting is slim
to none and the placement appears to be completely random. Tornillo (1994),
president of the Florida Education Association United, is concerned that
inclusion, as it all too frequently is being implemented, leaves classroom
teachers without the resources, training, and other supports necessary to teach
students with disabilities in their classrooms. Consequently, "the
disabled children are not getting appropriate, specialized attention and care,
and the regular students' education is disrupted constantly."
On the opposite side of the debate inclusion is said to have many positive
effects, specifically for SpEd students. Some people argue that the movement
has become so popular because of budget cuts rather than the students we are
serving. Still, we must take into consideration the benefits that Special Education
students have reaped during this movement. Researchers from Concordia
University say that by using both the regular
classroom and individualized time in special education classes, pupils are
exposed to mainstream students but get the attention they need for their
specific challenges. Several studies have suggested that overall, including
disabled children in mainstream classrooms improves academic achievement,
self-esteem and social skills.
I
see and understand both sides of the debate and tend to agree with various
points of view. My question has been, since I started observing and am now teaching,
is how we, as educators, promote higher level thinking for students who have
come to understand that answers, no matter how generic, will be provided
eventually. What they do not know is that we must provide notes, guided or in
full, to accommodate certain IEP’s. I’ve found that what this has done is
create a laziness or reluctance in some students because they know that, even
if they are asked to think and come up with their own answer, an answer will be
provided eventually. I know some will say why not simply provide the notes to
the students who need them? What I say to this is to keep in mind that the idea
is not to single out our SpEd students. We also do not want them sitting and
doing nothing until notes are finished.
As a way to work on issues such
as these I have started to informally assess students. I often walk around and
note the students who have at least attempted to come up with their own answers
and give them points for doing so. The students who simply refuse, unless
specified that they require guided notes in their IEP will lose points. This
has seemed to be improving participation from those who are fully capable.
Also, we have students that require their tests to be read out loud to them. In
those cases we offer for anyone, RegEd or SpEd, who would like a smaller
setting or the test read aloud to take the test with a Para or Co-Teacher in a separate
setting. CWC settings come with its challenges, but I believe with the proper
training and more intentional placement it could be relatively efficient.
