"Scott Weiser" wrote in message
...
A Usenet persona calling itself KMAN wrote:
in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/5/05 5:24 PM:
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:
Scott proposes a model tat contradicts earlier comments:
==================
It depends on the individual student, the particular class, and the
specific
needs of the disabled student. It may well require additional teaching
aides
to help the disabled student keep up. It may require special teaching
techniques and tools. It may even require modifying the *whole*
curriculum
so that the "normal" students participate in ways which help the
disabled
students through. Peer mentoring has had some success.
==============
I'm not entirely opposed to this. However, may I remind you that you
thought it entirely appropriate for wealthy parents, of brighter kids,
to take those kids out of the public school environment. Your point was
that they have every obligation to look after the best interests of
their child.
Let's go with that proposition.
What if I decide that it is NOT in my child's best interests to mentor
someone else? You claim the move to a private school, to "escape" the
public school environment, is appropriate for wealthy people. Where's
my child's right to "escape" and to have an individualized curriculum?
I never suggested that any child should be compelled to attend public
school
if private schools are an option, I merely state that for those who
must,
perforce, attend public school, they ought to be required to assist
those in
need as a part of the curriculum.
Ah. That has nothing to do with "mentoring." That is one person being
forced
to "help" another person who has not requested the help.
So? These are children, and they don't have the right to refuse to
participate in educational programs, even when those programs require
their
active participation in teaching other students, or helping other students
who need help. It helps create a sense of community and responsibility for
others, which is something that is sorely lacking in today's selfish
society.
It's not mentoring when neither party is willing or makes the choice.
The non-disabled student is not trained in supporting the individual with a
disability in an appropriate helper role and will serve the purpose of
teaching the individual with a disability that they are not competent and
need to be assigned a non-disabled person to make their decisions for them.
I also advocate mandatory national service upon graduation from high
school,
either in the Civilian Conservation Corps (or other like public works
entity) or military service.
That's a very different idea altogether. For example, having a voluntary
service requirement means finding an agency with a volunteer program,
receiving appropriate training and supervision, and supporting someone who
has made a choice to receive that support.
This is not only highly inappropriate, but dangerous. It helps teach the
person with a disability that non-disabled people are their superiors,
that
they are deficient beings who must rely on non-disabled people, that they
do
not make their own decisions about what support they want and who will
provide it, etc and so on.
Hogwash. Disabled people know they are disabled and are well aware of the
limitations they face and when they require assistance. Nobody is
suggesting
forcing assistance on anyone who is able to do something for themselves.
You
suggest that a student whose wheelchair is stuck in a hole ought to be
left
there without assistance, even if the occupant is incapable of
communicating
a desire for assistance.
There is a huge difference between having an attendant to assist with such
situations at one's request. This is not what I am talking about. I am
talking about those students who are forcibly "mainstreamed" into an
inappropriate curriculum.
Certainly if a disabled person wishes to do
something themselves, their wishes should be respected, and they should
always be encouraged to attempt self-sufficiency, but when help is
required,
there's nothing wrong with engaging other students in helping them.
Frocing them to do so is inappropriate. You are not picking up a piece of
poo from the schoolyard. It's a human being. If someone doesn't want to help
another human being, forcing them to do so is humliating for the person with
a disability and only teaches the person being forced to project their anger
onto an innocent party.
All part of what contributes to making them an
extremely vulnerable population. It also teaches the non-disabled student
that it is appropriate and normal for them to assume a position of power
over people with disabilities.
Poppycock. There are no power issues here, there is simple human
compassion
and friendship. Your argument presupposes a selfish motive in the teaching
of compassion.
Forcing someone to perform a task against their will has nothing to do with
the teaching of compassion. It might possibly help someone to develop a
sense of duty, which of course can mean a lot of things.