A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott texplains:
=================
The whole reason that "mainstreaming" is being mandated in many places
is
precisely BECAUSE of the sort of attitude that you demonstrate that the
disabled are a "burden" on society, which is the same thing as saying
they
are worthless, unworthy and ought to be hidden away someplace where we
don't
have to look at them and don't have to deal with them, and don't have
to
expose our children to them.
===================

I demonstrate *no* attitude.

I disagree. Your persona attitude comes through loud and clear. Please note
that I am not attributing this persona to you, the real person.

So far I have described actual events.

You've done a good deal of editorializing, not just stating facts.

You
have advocated shunning PC language in favor of "telling it like it
is". That's all I've done.

No problem. All I've done is challenge your persona's assertions.


I didn't say anything at all about "burden on society". You chose to
read that into my comments. Please recall, that's what you admonish
others for.

I see the implication, I state the observation.


I said they were, in some instances, a burden on the learning
environment in classrooms.

Well, now that you're finally *qualifying* your statement by admitting that
you're positing worst-case scenearios.

They inhibit the ability of other pupils to
learn (and the ability of the teacher to teach).

I deny both as a categorical truth. I don't believe that students cannot
learn to ignore distractions. In fact, I argue that providing them with
distractions *causes* them to learn to concentrate. Concentration leads to
better learning.

Further, as KMAN
points out, the mainstreamed classroom may be completely inappropriate
for the child with disabilities as well. His description of "nose
picking and pecker player" was particularly poignant, because I've seen
both.

As have I. Still, hiding them away because they pick their nose or pull
their pud is discriminatory. Clearly, what's needed is some additional
assistance for the disabled child so that he is not bored. Nobody said it
was easy, or cheap.


I stand by my statement "they are, in some instances, a burden on the
learning environment in classrooms." I challenge you to demonstrate
otherwise.

I will agree with the statement "in rare instances." For the most part, most
"disabled" children can be successfully mainstreamed, in combination with
additional special education. This is true because the profoundly disabled,
who are the likely "pecker pullers" comprise only a small component of the
disabled student population. The vast majority of students with disabilities
both need and can benefit from mainstreaming. In those rare instances where
it simply doesn't work out, some other plan is needed.


--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser