I am currently in my tenth year of teaching. In that that time I have looped with my class from second to third grade. I have looped from third to fourth. I have had a traditional classroom (one class for one year). Next was team teaching with two separate classrooms. Following that was single gender classrooms with team teaching. Another year of mixed gender with continued team teaching. That leads me to this year when I moved to a double classroom with team teaching and co-teaching. One aspect of my classes has remained the same every year. Each year I have students with special education Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) and teach them through a push in or inclusion program. And yes, I have asked to be an inclusion teacher every year.
Now please don't get me wrong and picture me as a serene person who does not stress out about this professional choice. Every year I want to pull my hair out and every year I question my decision. Every argument that Karen Agne makes against inclusion runs through my mind on a regular basis (Agne, 1998). I question if I am giving enough attention to the students who struggle yet do not qualify for an IEP. I experience anxiety wondering if I am challenging those students who already know and can apply the knowledge I am delivering to the class. And then the mom in me comes out. And I wonder, what if it were my child? And this question is on every level. Not just, what if my child were the one with the IEP, but what if my child is the one who needs to be challenged? Or, what if my child were the one that struggles but not enough to get support? Every year I draw the same conclusion. I believe that all students are better off with inclusion.
Agne argues that little education can take place when there is a "disruptive, emotionally disturbed child" in the classroom (Agne, 1998, p. 250). She also quotes a teacher expressing the frustration that a brain damaged child has never expressed any sign of learning, yet by law is required to sit in her class every day (Agne, 1998, p. 250). I would argue back that there is an education going on. Just not the one that the curriculum is creating. The education that goes on with inclusion is one of awareness and acceptance. The scenarios Agne portrays are very different than what occurs in my classroom. I have support. As Jean B. Arnold and Harold W. Dodge acknowledge, inclusion on any level is a team effort (Arnold and Dodge, 1994, p. 248) When you are in my co-taught classroom, that means a certified special education teacher comes in for the content areas that students have IEP goals in. Currently, that means we have three certified teachers for Math and our Language Arts block. Our special education teacher also has the flexibility to pull small groups for reteaching or further instruction if the lesson that we are doing does not fit student needs. This is the way we help ALL students make progress, no matter the educational starting point (Agne, 1998, p. 252).
Our classroom also discusses openly and on a regular basis how each student learns differently. Because of the number of adults we have, I am able to run small groups that focus on our gifted and talented students. We have numerous class conversations on how that gifted and talented group is flexible due to each individuals' strengths as a learner. Talk of all of the support our class has to offer in regards to the number of adults is also routinely brought up so the stigma of working with our special education teacher is dispelled. Often, students see it as a privilege to work with her in a small group setting versus it being a punishment. The power of classroom conversations with the purpose of creating acceptance for all learners was clearly absent in Agne's argument.
Now, I do not live in a bubble and realize that my situation is unique. The question is, does it have to be? If we are required by law to give each student access to all curriculum as designed by parents and school officials, why can't we all have an inclusion utopia (Arnold and Dodge, Agne, 1998, p. 242)? I feel it is because it is a lot of work. Arnold and Dodge understand that inclusion does not mean putting a student with special needs in a general education classroom and leaving them to his/her own devices. They communicate that you design an educational program that is best for the student with special needs and consider all student needs as well (Arnold and Dodge, 1994, p. 244). In my class if there is student or behavior getting in the way of the education of the majority of class, it is dealt with immediately. This goes for students with special needs and those without. My main priority is to provide an education to all students no matter of ability, race, gender, interests-nothing. If there is something or someone getting in the way of that education, a plan goes into action. And even though that plan might take me away for the lesson written in my plans, all students are still getting knowledge. They are seeing first hand that not all students learn the same way but all students have value and deserve the right to access education.
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Purposeful Dialogue
Typically when a topic comes up about education, I have a strong opinion. Yet, when it comes to moral education, I didn't until recently. Maybe it was because I felt I don't have time for it. Maybe I felt it was the parents' responsibility to build in morals. Maybe I was doing it and not even realizing it. Now I know it was and still is going on. I have a major impact on the development of my students' moral education. Yet I feel there is a right way to do it. Graham Haydon states, one of the views of moral education is, "that all education is in a sense moral education" (Haydon, 2005, p. 2). It is also pointed out by the same author that "moral education is but one aspect of education" (Haydon, 2005, p. 2).What I now feel strongly about is the way I develop my students' moral education.
It is impossible to teach and not express or model some of my moral views on to my students. We do it as a whole school. When we teach our students our school-wide behavior expectation systems, we are in a sense developing their virtues (Graham, 2005, p. 5). A major part of our behavior lessons is having students talk about what behaviors they see in the videos and making judgments on what type of behaviors those are. As Graham brings up, discussion is a vital part of the moral education schools can provide, but also requires students to make value judgments (Graham, 2005, p. 8) (Lickona, 1991, p. 8). More specifically, I am developing my students' moral education when I express my expectations of them. I am also developing them when I bring up examples of behavior I have seen and how I expect those behaviors will not be seen again.
What I think is the most important and often minimized part of moral education is explicit discussion. Kids like to talk. My students especially process verbally more than in their own minds. It is a natural stage of the developing process. When something is out of the ordinary in the class. When the schedule does not follow the routine. When one of the regular staff members are gone. My students continually process. And as they process, they ask questions. This naturally leads to a discussion of the origin of the change. At the beginning of every day I go over our daily schedule and take questions on our day. Even though this is a stretch to connect to moral education, it is still a vital link. My students are not able to deal with change until there is information that supports it. The same is true for moral education. There can not be positive growth in the area of children's moral education without discussion and dialogue (Haydon, 2005, p. 8).
In my class this is most directly tied to student behavior. A few years ago I had a student that was diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder. She was very intelligent, yet the behaviors she demonstrated on a daily basis were disturbing to the other students. The other students were not able to concentrate due to her verbal and physical responses to the adults in the room. They were also uncomfortable that her behaviors did not fit the "norm." Haydon concludes that the aim of moral education will create tension with each other yet there is reason to pursue it (Haydon, 2005, p. 9). So, instead of ignoring the signs from my students that they were uncomfortable with her behaviors, we talked about it. We brought in our district social worker and talked about what ASD was and how it could affect someone. The positive attributes of their classmate were emphasized (because she was such an interesting and valuable part of our class!) so students could look beyond her behaviors. That to me was the best educating I had done all year. I was teaching moral values to my students in a way that let them express concern and responded with knowledge about how minds of students work differently. The message that was clearly sent was differences are okay.
We also gave the class strategies of how to model appropriate classroom behavior and to encourage our classmate to do them as well. We gave them techniques to help redirect her behavior if they saw her anxiety being expressed. Now let me get on my soap box for a quick minute. I understand that not all classroom behavior expectations make sense for every child. I was not, and my students were not, asking this child to change who she was. We were just trying to help her be understood by the class and to have them see value in who she was as a person. We were also trying to give the students permission to ask questions and to accept differences in others. Thomas Lickona address that "there is a clear and urgent need" for values education (Lickona, 1991, p. 20). This was my goal and still is today. There is no longer strength in combining ignorance with false judgements. I could have easily dealt with my student's behaviors in a figurative bubble and redirected or ignored other students' desires for answers. Yet, that would be sending an even louder message to them-that we ignore differences and move on without understanding them. That to me is moral education of another kind.
Moral education is present in every classroom and should be. Questions regarding differences in morals should not be ignored but discussed in a purposeful way. This is the way to having acceptance of a variety of morals in classrooms and eventually the community outside of it.
It is impossible to teach and not express or model some of my moral views on to my students. We do it as a whole school. When we teach our students our school-wide behavior expectation systems, we are in a sense developing their virtues (Graham, 2005, p. 5). A major part of our behavior lessons is having students talk about what behaviors they see in the videos and making judgments on what type of behaviors those are. As Graham brings up, discussion is a vital part of the moral education schools can provide, but also requires students to make value judgments (Graham, 2005, p. 8) (Lickona, 1991, p. 8). More specifically, I am developing my students' moral education when I express my expectations of them. I am also developing them when I bring up examples of behavior I have seen and how I expect those behaviors will not be seen again.
What I think is the most important and often minimized part of moral education is explicit discussion. Kids like to talk. My students especially process verbally more than in their own minds. It is a natural stage of the developing process. When something is out of the ordinary in the class. When the schedule does not follow the routine. When one of the regular staff members are gone. My students continually process. And as they process, they ask questions. This naturally leads to a discussion of the origin of the change. At the beginning of every day I go over our daily schedule and take questions on our day. Even though this is a stretch to connect to moral education, it is still a vital link. My students are not able to deal with change until there is information that supports it. The same is true for moral education. There can not be positive growth in the area of children's moral education without discussion and dialogue (Haydon, 2005, p. 8).
In my class this is most directly tied to student behavior. A few years ago I had a student that was diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder. She was very intelligent, yet the behaviors she demonstrated on a daily basis were disturbing to the other students. The other students were not able to concentrate due to her verbal and physical responses to the adults in the room. They were also uncomfortable that her behaviors did not fit the "norm." Haydon concludes that the aim of moral education will create tension with each other yet there is reason to pursue it (Haydon, 2005, p. 9). So, instead of ignoring the signs from my students that they were uncomfortable with her behaviors, we talked about it. We brought in our district social worker and talked about what ASD was and how it could affect someone. The positive attributes of their classmate were emphasized (because she was such an interesting and valuable part of our class!) so students could look beyond her behaviors. That to me was the best educating I had done all year. I was teaching moral values to my students in a way that let them express concern and responded with knowledge about how minds of students work differently. The message that was clearly sent was differences are okay.
We also gave the class strategies of how to model appropriate classroom behavior and to encourage our classmate to do them as well. We gave them techniques to help redirect her behavior if they saw her anxiety being expressed. Now let me get on my soap box for a quick minute. I understand that not all classroom behavior expectations make sense for every child. I was not, and my students were not, asking this child to change who she was. We were just trying to help her be understood by the class and to have them see value in who she was as a person. We were also trying to give the students permission to ask questions and to accept differences in others. Thomas Lickona address that "there is a clear and urgent need" for values education (Lickona, 1991, p. 20). This was my goal and still is today. There is no longer strength in combining ignorance with false judgements. I could have easily dealt with my student's behaviors in a figurative bubble and redirected or ignored other students' desires for answers. Yet, that would be sending an even louder message to them-that we ignore differences and move on without understanding them. That to me is moral education of another kind.
Moral education is present in every classroom and should be. Questions regarding differences in morals should not be ignored but discussed in a purposeful way. This is the way to having acceptance of a variety of morals in classrooms and eventually the community outside of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)