Does full inclusion offer an Rx for enhancing the education of minority deaf students?

Abstract

If mandatory inclusion becomes part of the upcoming reauthorization of I.D.E.A., it will effectively remove the ability of all parents to make appropriate choices for their children. I believe that choices among different options are sacred and should not be deleted from the law. My belief parallels the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf's policy on inclusion , that being "the commitment to the concept and practice of educating deaf and hard of hearing children in the most appropriate, least restrictive environment". We must note that what is most appropriate for educating individual deaf and hard of hearing children depends on many factors such as the condition of their family and the willingness and ability of their parents to make sacrifices, the natural abilities of the children themselves, and the availability of services. We must also take into consideration the fact that though a particular option works well for one child, this does not necessarily mean it will work well for another. Each child is unique and his or her needs must be assessed before actual placement. Why place a hard of hearing student in a residential school for the deaf if he or she can function communicatively pretty well in a hearing world? Will a profoundly deaf child who never had the opportunity to learn to talk or listen at an early age succeed in a regular classroom of 30 hearing students? Both of these examples are somewhat extreme , but they do show why placement options must remain available for all deaf children. It is my opinion that inclusion without appropriate support where needed fosters exclusion within as well as outside the classroom. A continuum of educational settings must be available to meet the varying individual needs of children who are deaf or hard of hearing. These options include, but are not limited to: full mainstreaming in regular classrooms , partial mainstreaming, selfcontained classes in regular schools, and residential and day schools for the deaf. When placing a child in a particular educational setting, consideration must be given to the child's speech, language, psychological traits, and academic abilities. Decisions regarding placement must be made by parents in concert with directly involved professionals in accordance with procedures set forth in the I.D.E.A. Regardless of the type of setting, deaf students must receive support from well-qualified and appropriate professionals. In conclusion, I believe that the preservation of educational placement options and choices is in order, and that a guarantee of this kind must be included in the upcoming reauthorization of I.D.E.A. I do not support the placement of all deaf children in regular classrooms nor the placement of all deaf children in residential or day schools for the deaf. Neither do I support a concept of inclusion that would advocate the placement of a deaf or hard of hearing child in a regular classroom without the provision of necessary supplementary aids and services. Does Full Inclusion Offer An Rx for Enhancing the Education of Minority Deaf Students? Reginald Redding Director Center for Student Resources National Technical Institute for the Deaf Glenn B. Anderson Director of Training Research and Training Center for Individuals Woo Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing University of Arkansas During December 1993, a publication headline and a conference title encapsulated the positions staked out in the current debates over full inclusion as a policy for the education of children with disabilities, including those who are deaf or hard of hearing. The headline read: "Inclusion Debate Heats, Education Department Says Policy Can Benefit Students " {Report on Disability Programs , December 23, 1993). "Schools for the Deaf Will Remain Open: Why Inclusion Will Not Work For Many Deaf Children" was the title of the conference, an annual forum sponsored by an educational program for deaf students located in the northeastern United States. Also occurring in December 1993 was a summit convened by deaf leaders representing deaf education as well as special education to address concerns related to the new interpretation of the inclusion policy supported by the U.S. Department of Education. When the current discourse over full inclusion is put in historical perspective , it can be perceived as part...