BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/6/05 4:36 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself KMAN wrote:

in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/5/05 10:15 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott incorrectly states:
===============
You falsely assume that all disable students are equal, and that all of
them
are incapable of comprehending chemistry and that all of them do
nothing but
pick their noses. This is merely ignorant bigotry.
================

KMAN does nothing of the sort. You just keep reading it that way.
Surely from everything he's said thus far, you can't believe that of
him.

I merely analyze his statements here, which so indicate.

I've stated unequivocally that there are students with disabilities who
benefit from the same curriculum as non-disabled peers.

But you consistently argue a debate about general "mainstreaming" policy
within the narrow framework of one particular student who may not benefit.

Mainstreaming of any student who cannot benefit from the "mainstream"
curriculum is inappropriate.

You are deliberately
misconstruing my position, and started doing so the moment your own
arguments were shown to be lacking. This is around the time you got all
snark about the idea that you weren't getting enough credit for your
knowledge on this topic.

Not really. I'm simply not allowing you to set policy based on one extreme
example. I'm arguing for nuance and erring on the side of inclusiveness,
while you seem to be arguing on the side of exclusion.

The mainstreaming of students into a setting with an inappropriate
curriculum results in exclusion. High school is not forever. Forcing a
student with a disability into a class that is not meeting their learning
needs is humiliating for that student and does not "include" them with the
other students.

Giving a student a curriculum that meets their needs, supports achievement,
and results in a greater ability to participate in the community is the path
to the greatest possible level of inclusion.