This week we talked about
the “so what” of special education. If we don’t know the “so what” then there’s
no point nor purpose for attempting to educate the child. IEP’s would be
pointless, collaboration would be a waste of time, and setting goals would just
absorb effort without meaningful results. The hardest part about the material
for the week is memorizing all the different court cases and their result and
effect on special education. I understand the basic principles, but the
specifics are harder to pin down.
I guess I would spend
more time with flash cards/memory activities (like the ones we do in class) to
help organize it all. The matching activities really help because it’s more tactile
than reading out of the textbook or online articles (and yes, reading the
actual court cases does nothing for my learning… the official jargon was a
really good sleep aid though).
After further study I’ll
be better able to use this information in my early intervention practice, especially
the part about what I can tell parents. It’s important for me to collaborate
with parents because I won’t (more than likely) be tied to a school system that
restricts what I can say. I can suggest further therapy or activities and not
be obligated to provide such services. I will be the front line of defense to
helping these kids get a better start on their education and development.
Questions:
1. Does inadequate access to education require
intervention, or just more time?
2. If the child is boarder-line and ineligible
to receive services, then what?
No comments:
Post a Comment