Stanley L. Swartz, Ph.D.

Question #2

Samantha Stoliker — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:21:41 GMT

2. Should accountability extend to special education? Should we include children with disabilities in standardized testing?

I have been a Substitute Teacher/Substitute Educational Assistant for a little over a year now and I have seen a plethora of different types of classes. I have worked mostly in County Special Education Classes so that is what I am pulling my reference from, and in those classes I have seen everything from students who are fully functioning and already mainstreamed into general education classrooms to students who cannot even get out of the bed/wheelchair they are brought to school in. I know that the variety of students is not this extreme in a general education classroom but I find that the degrees of ability are just as broad and different. It is my personal option that standardized tests are inappropriate at best. Students, whether they have disabilities or not, form a rainbow of strengths, abilities and learning styles. Even an honor student could be a terrible test taker, they could freeze when asked to take a test and do poorly, but that does not mean that they are not learning. I think that trying to fit all students into some model of how education is supposed to be absorbed is stupid and unachievable

Each student has needs, some can give an oral answer without a hitch, but when asked to write the same answer they cannot achieve the same level of fluency. I think with students in special education the standardized testing is even less helpful; mostly because for many students with disabilities just learning to tie their own shoes is considered an academic step.

I think that Standardized tests have really limited what and how teachers teach these days and that they should be removed, but I know that the government needs some way of testing what the general student populous knows. Unfortunately, standardized testing is here to stay, but it should only be given to those students who are academically able to do them. If a student with disabilities is mainstreamed into, a general education class and they can take the test, even if they need modifications that it could be done. However, the students with disabilities whose entire academic career is spent just learning life skills, those students should not be included in testing, it wouldnt reflect what they know and just make the program look bad.

As afore mentioned I dont think any student should take these tests but if they must as required by law then the students with disabilities who are capable should take them as well to experience what their peers do.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Question #2

Tiffany Raymondo — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:01:06 GMT

Should accountability extend to special education? Should we include children with disabilities in standardized testing? I think that there should be accountability to a certain extent. I am just not so sure that standardized testing is the way it should be done. I do not like how schools and districts now a days only focus on testing. I feel like it has lost it's purpose. Now many people are teaching to the test because that is what is important, when it should be about the child's learning. Some students know the information they need to know but do not perform well on the test. I believe a test alone can not prove what a child is learning. It does not prove what a child is absorbing and what they have learned. A child can be taught a way to find the correct answer on a test, but it does not prove that they have learned the skill they needed to learn. I think standards are a good way of keeping us all on track but not necessarily the most important measure. I think accountablity is good but the way it is measured and the importance that is being placed on one test is not. If a special education student is going to be tested the test they are going to take should be appropriate to their abilities. It should be IEP based not grade level based. A special needs child who is in fifth grade should not be tested at a fifth grade level is their abilities are at a first grade level. At that point it just proves what is already known, they are not able to function at their grade level. It does not prove that they are learning and working towards their IEP goals. With that said I do think that they should be accountable for the progress and gains they are making towards their goals; I am just not sure how that can be done. I am not sure that standardized testing is a fair way of measuring their progress.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Question #1

Tiffany Raymondo — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:48:24 GMT

I think it could be reasonable especially if the regular ed teacher had help from a special ed teacher. Every child deserves the right to learn. The regular ed class is very diverse as it is; a child with special needs is still a child just like all of the other students in regular education. They may need to learn a little different, but everyone learns differently right? With modification and support from a special ed teacher along with other staff I think it would be possible for a regular ed teacher. It is a teacher's job to aid a child in learning. It may be harder on a teacher to work with children from that population but with the support from a special education teacher it can be done. Teachers and staff will have to work together and support one another to help each and every child succeed in school. Teachers are here to help students learn and grow as human beings. Students that they help are going to grow up and contribute to their community and society one way or another. It has been shown that students with special needs learn better when they are around regular ed students. I think it is also important for regular ed children to be around children with disabilities because they need to learn tolerance for those children. Regular ed children are going to encounter someone with a special need sometime in their community. I think it is better that they learn from an early age that they are just human beings like they are so they don't treat them any different. In the real world everyone is different and in the end we are all just human beings.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Question 1

Sheldon Halpern — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:59:34 GMT

It is reasonable to expect regular classroom teachers to provide for the needs of a child with disabilities in their classroom?

The current trend in special education is an inclusion model. The least restrictive environment for most students with disabilities is the regular classroom. Whether it is a reasonable placement really depends on the nature and severity of the disability. A student with mild mental retardation who needs some minor modifications and/or accommodationsnot a problem to provide for all of his/her educational needs in the regular classroom. A wheelchair bound student with severe mental retardation that has a feeding tube and wears diapers has a significantly higher level of needs, may also be able to participate, but possibly only partially, in a regular classroom setting.

It all comes down to what is reasonable and appropriate. What level of support does the student need to be successful in a regular classroom setting? Most special needs students can manage by themselves in a regular classroom with modifications or accommodations, while others need a full time instructional aide with them at all times.

What about the regular education teacher? What support would be available for this person? The higher level of needs of the student has to translate into a higher level of support for the teacher. The collaborative model provides that level of support. When implemented properly, the resource teacher is in the regular classroom and works side by side with the regular teacher, providing support for the special needs students in the class.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Question 3

Eliane Salmon — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:08:57 GMT

I would make sure no teacher would be allowed to integrate disabled students in class without having appropriate training, equipment, assistance, and resources. Additionally, I would do differentiated integration, that is, make sure that the integration would take place differently for different children according to their needs, and to their feelings. Therefore, the number of hours to spend in normal classes during the day would not be the same for all disabled children, nor would it remain the same during the year.

I also feel that flexibility and responsiveness are very important in education, both for the learner, and for the teacher. This would mean that an overwhelmed teacher would also need attention and support as school year adventures evolve. In fact, services to children with disabilities are rendered by teachers, and therefore how teachers are treated affects directly the kind of services disabled students end up getting.

Additionally, I would certainly train and involve more parents in the process of understanding and supporting their special needs children. Thus, parents would do a better job at home, collaborating more pertinently with their students teachers while at home but also in school. For a better parent/school involvement, districts would need to value parental collaboration by offering a sufficient budget and a status of part time flexible employment in addition to inviting parents for volunteering. I would also organize such well informed and skilled parents in networking with other parents who share the same concerns, needs and feelings for their disabled children. Here again, the children would end up enjoying a better service rendered to them, because their parents would be empowered by the much needed knowledge and support.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Question 2

Eliane Salmon — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:05:49 GMT

I believe we all need to be held accountable for whatever we do, one way or another. Disability students, depending on their disability, might or might not be learning disabled. On the other hand, standardized testing, basically works in relative terms. For instance the API targets for schools are calculated annually and as 5% of the gap between the schools current API and the general objective of 800 points of API, over a scale of 1000 maximum possible. Therefore, the school would not be necessarily penalized because of the integration of the disabled, provided that the disabled students achieve some progress during the year, no matter what their level at the beginning of the year. Of course, if most disabled students were learning disabled cases, then their integration would penalize the general accountability results of the host school. But, this impact would be close to negligible given the small percentage represented by such students. Therefore, if it was a proven fact that these students would progress more in normalized classes, and if the school system takes all the precautions to protect the progression of all other so called normal students, then I feel there would be no excuse, and the teachers could be expected to cooperate. Having said this, unfortunately the cases of inappropriate organization or unpreparedness to integrate disables students are only too frequent, and often frustrating. I would have another serious concern for such students self esteem while taking standardized tests that would not take into account all their difficulties that are out of their control. In extreme cases, far too many, the validity of such tests become questionable. Or even worse, such standardized tests would no more even measure the real progress that the disabled student has after all achieved! In these cases standardized testing, in addition to being useless and misleading in terms of progression statistics, it simply becomes a source of frustration and discouragement for the disabled student who would, one more time become a victim of adult politics.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Question 1

Eliane Salmon — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:03:50 GMT

Many general education teachers are already overburdened with large class sizes and have little expertise in assisting students with learning and behavioral difficulties. Therefore, before adding a child with disabilities in their classroom these teachers should be prepared and willing to provide appropriate education to this child with special needs.

There is no doubt that adding a child with disabilities in their classroom would represent working differently. But it may not necessarily mean to work more in the long run. In fact, any modification such as additional students, new manuals, or new school policies or expectations would always generate additional work at the beginning. But, how things evolve does greatly depend on other work environment factors. Therefore, if the integration of a disable student is accompanied by appropriate support by the school the experience could become enrichment for all parties involved, and the experience would be one that is reasonable. Among such possible supports from the school I would mention: appropriate technology and equipment, appropriate initial and continuing training, presence of an assistant as needed, appropriate budget and/or specific material and pedagogical resources, and of course appropriate recognition, appreciation and compensation for the new and higher level of service rendered. For instance, integrating a blind in a class while supported by appropriate teacher training, special keyboard laptop, subscription to specialized online voice libraries, available or provided for tactile resources, an assistant as needed, and special Ed resource colleague to consult as needed seems to me to be manageable, and may be even a source of enrichment.

Therefore, I feel that depending on how this integration of a student with disabilities is organized, this could be challenging but reasonable or unreasonable.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Question #3

Christy Marshall — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:28:44 GMT

I do find it sad and upsetting that so many young students are in school usually into the 3^rd grade before anyone steps in and creates an IEP for a student who quite possibly could learning disability. This makes the problem even more intense for the student since we could have helped the child with early intervention. I believe by the time an IEP is made the student is so far behind in their class that they get frustrated and could possible check out. Children who do not have insurance and or do not have the mean to get tested by a physical end up going without the educational program they need. I believe that we need to test children before they enter kindergarten to get an idea of what their strengths and weaknesses are. From that point forward we can watch their growth and determine by the end of kindergarten if the student should have some sort of intervention whether it be resource, or some kind of specialty program. I know that as educators we do not have the right to give a prognosis to a child but many children, who have not yet seen a doctor at their age, need some kind of specialty program. Also in special education we are not always provide the right tools to effectively help the child needs. For example: the school I work at has many children who could benefit from aqua therapy but for money reasons we cant provide a pool just to help those children.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

#3 question

marirose camarillo — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:38:35 GMT

If you could change the way we provide services to children with disabilities, what would you recommend?

As a parent of a child with disabilities, I personally think a few things could change. As for example the process of entering Special education is far too lengthy and requires a huge amount of process. Some cases vary depending on the student, however if a student displays many charactistics of special education needs, then why many S.S.Ts? also many students go undetected for that reason and thus making it almost impossible for intervention. As for having extra services I think everything available now has many venues for all types of disabilities. As with the video Special Child, Special Rights , the rights include PL 94-142, part 99, and many federal laws which allows for a team to produce an IEP for the child. As many parents are aware of their rights many of the children will be expose to all services. However those who are not I do feel we should not be allow to share with them those rights. With many school districts it falls back to the money issue and what schools are and are not allow offering to parents. Most students have a great IEP and other require an advocate and helping in their planning of needs. So as for now services to children with disabilities would only need minor changes to the process of the initial placement into special education.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

#2 question

marirose camarillo — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:17:49 GMT

Should accountability extend to special education? Should we include children with disabilities in standardized testing?

Standardized testing is bias and does not give an accurate result. Many of the students are not classed according to geographic area, yet they are assumed to be all equal. Such as it is assumed that all students come from well balanced homes, where both parents are present. Next it is also assumed that students have had a good night sleep and a warm healthy breakfast. Last it is thought that most of them have done their best at taking the test, when in reality most of the students are in one parent homes, whose parents are always working and have no structure. Another reason is that most of them only eat properly at school. By giving these tests and expecting the same results from different students makes it a very bias test. for instance, a student who has a newer school with no distractions will do better compared to the students who goes to school in the inner city. By giving the same test to both, which one has a better chance of success? Also special education students can not delivery the same results as regular students. The tests should be accommodating to all schools, districts, and geographic areas. Many of the students should be able to provide progress reports rather then be given the standardized test. They tests are merely according to monies given for high scores, so what is really the main purpose of these tests?

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

#1 question

marirose camarillo — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:43:52 GMT

Many regular classroom teachers feel overwhelmed by their current duties. It is reasonable to expect them to provide for the needs of a child with disabilities in their classroom?

Californias current budget crisis is given a new answer to this question. Many regular education teachers feel overwhelmed, by adding any child with disabilities adds more stress. Idea k-5 classrooms have a ratio of 20 to 1, now classroom have a ratio of anywhere of 25 - 27 to 1 ratio, making the teacher feel very overwhelmed. However if done properly and outlined according for the teacher any student with disabilities can be included into a regular classroom. It may not be the full inclusion, but even for the areas the students is able to follow along with the teacher. I personally shadow three SDC students into first grade classroom for 30 minutes, two times a day during math and open court sections. During this time did I rarely intervene with the teachers instruction. However this teacher is very well organized and properly prepare for her classroom making for a successful opportunity for the students with disabilities. Many studies have shown the end results of proper inclusion. By introducing them to peer interactions, social exposure, as well as great learning experiences. So regular teacher can provide needs for a child with disabilities and include them in the classroom if done properly and according with the help of the special education teacher. So yes I do believe it is reasonable to work with them in providing a student with disabilities some kinds of need in the classroom.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Discussion #3

Matthew Arreola — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:02:07 GMT

If you could change the way we provide services to children with disabilities, what would you recommend?

If I could recommend the way we provide services to children, I would increase the intervention process, so that it would be easier for families/students to make the transition easier. In addition, I would make the intervention process accessible for economically disadvantaged people without insurance and provide social services tailored to meet the individual's needs. According to the text, a large percentage of children with disabilities seem more susceptible in prolonging the disability without help due to economic disadvantages, social traumas and lack of proper insights and knowledge about how to confront the issues surrounding a disability . In addition, children with a disability from a lower economic family may be struggling from parental support (divorced/single parent), domestic violence, individuals in the family nucleus suffering from drug/alcohol abuse and the basic needs (shelter, transportation, employment).

An early intervention process would be big foundation in supporting and nurturing a student with a disability, so they may strive for academic success throughout all their years during public education. Children develop and learn at different rates cognitively, emotionally, socially and express their desires, needs and wants in diverse ways. Therefore, early interventions along with consistent social support would help increase there progression to succeed in all functional areas throughout all their major transitions. Early interventions and proper social support would help families cope, learn and adapt to a better quality of life for the student, parents, siblings and other individuals in daily contact with the child. This change could help/support the child with a disability into the final stages of transitions into independence.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals

Word Walls

Dr. Swartz — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:36:33 GMT

Using the Word Wall

The literate classroom environment is one where print information is accessible to students. Accessible means more than just posting print that students can see, it means posting print that students can use to support their reading and writing activities. The extent to which students participate in the production of the print in the environment increases the likelihood that they will use it. The literate classroom environment provides a transition from problem solving that is teacher centered to developing skills that will support student independence.

The word wall is an important part of the literate environment and a source of information that students can access initially with teacher prompting, with the end goal of students using it independently. The word wall is at its most effective as a display of high frequency words. High frequency words are just that, words that show up in print and are needed for writing, consistently and frequently. For example, the words and, I, and the represent almost ten percent of written text. High frequency words are usually abstract in that specific meaning is difficult to establish. Phonics as a source of information is also problematic because of the number of high frequency words that are irregular. Because of this students are asked to recognize these words by sight. Posting these words on a word wall serves as a reminder to students that these are words they need to know how to read and write automatically.

Words should be added to a word wall when they are used in text or as they are needed for writing. This makes the process of adding words to the wall authentic and based on student need rather than teacher selected or arbitrary. Many teachers have found that words that students write themselves are more effective than those that are printed or written by the teacher. The conversations and discussions that are part of an interactive writing of high frequency words are a powerful reinforcement that increases student ownership of the words written and the likelihood of their use.

There are many other words that can be posted as sources of information in the literate classroom. Vocabulary words that come from textbooks or units of study are good examples. An effective way to display these words is on content word lists, separate from the word wall, that focus thematically. These lists might be posted on the classroom walls during the unit of study and then archived for independent use at a later time.

The word wall and content word lists serve different purposes. The word wall is meant to reinforce the automaticity of high frequency words. Content word lists are meant to support thematic study and vocabulary development. The combination of these two goals on one list results in an undifferentiated display of words that is overwhelming by virtue of its sheer size and because of that is rendered virtually useless. Consider an adult perspective where a list is developed that includes your shopping list, to do list, Christmas card list, list of phone numbers and email addresses all in one. The access problem for this kind of a list is the same access difficulty that students experience when a massive number of words are listed on a word wall. The key to the effective display of words in a classroom is to remember the purpose for the display and the learning that words posted in the room can support.

The word wall and its use changes over time and over grade levels. Preschool and Kindergarten might begin the year with an empty word wall and add words used in shared reading or words students need for interactive writing. Subsequent grades might begin the year with words that were learned in prior years. Should the number of words on the word wall become too large, words that all students have under control might be removed and archived on charts. There are various word lists available that rank order the frequency of their use in text. The first 25 words on these lists make up about a third and the first 100 make up more than a half of all written material. It is anticipated that the words that students need for reading and writing will occur in text similar to the order of these lists. The word wall evolves from primary grades where words like for, on, and with are posted to the intermediate grades that might include words like difficult, general and material. At any point that a word listed earlier becomes a source of confusion it can be added back to the word wall for further review.

The word wall can be accessed during whole group instruction such as shared reading, interactive writing and interactive editing. A student might be asked to locate a word on the word wall that needs support during a shared reading or is a word selected for use during interactive writing. In interactive editing, once the key content words are identified, the word wall serves as a source for the high frequency words needed to complete the writing. Students are also encouraged to use the word wall during small group instruction and when working independently in reading and writing. The key to an effective word wall is how the teacher uses it. Helping students access the literate environment as a source of information is important for the transition from the teacher as the primary source of information to increased student independence where students learn to solve their own problems.

Forum: The Foundation for Comprehensive Early Literacy Learning

PBS article

Dr. Swartz — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:33:01 GMT

http://www.ldworldwide.org/ldinformation/educators/ssl/v3/SSL11-09_benhar.html

Forum: Special Education Network

Discussion #1

Christina Chavez — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:23:11 GMT

In the state of California, regular education teachers feel very overwhelmed by their current duties. They are expected to incorporate test taking strategies, and testing information into their curriculum as well as have parent teacher conferences, modify instruction for ELL learners, work with behavior management, and make sure that they teach all the state standards in the allocated teaching time. The amount of work and the added stress of being pressured for their students to do well on the state tests would drive any teacher crazy, but regular education teachers do have a responsibility to teach every student of every ethnicity/race, background, and every education level, including students with disabilities, so they should be expected to take a disabled student into their classroom.

I dont feel however that it would be reasonable to place a special education child in their classroom unless they get support from school staff, the special ed teacher and have the resources available that he or she needs to teach the special education child. The teacher would need to be able to meet with the special education teacher on a regular basis, have help with the childs IEP and possibly have an aid if needed. It is very difficult for a regular teacher with no training for special education children to receive a child that they have no background knowledge for. For this reason, I do think that the regular teacher should be trained in some way so they dont get even more overwhelmed than they already are.

Though having the special education student placed in the regular classroom with the regular teacher will be rough at first, it will benefit the special child and make him feel more accepted, while also teaching the regular students and teacher how to be more compassionate to others who might be a little different.

Forum: ESPE 530 - Psychology and Education of Exceptional Individuals