Inclusion Debate

4 Pages
62 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Interdisciplinary Studies
Course
INST 210
Professor
Lynch
Semester
Fall

Description
Jordan Hamilton, Brittany Trexler, Robin Hernandez, Callie Clyde and Keith Owen 12/02/2013 INST 310-505B Inclusion Debate 1. Names of group members who participated and a detailed description of each group member’s participation (students with minimal participation will not receive full credit for the debate). Keith Owen and Jordan Hamilton read “Inclusion by Design,” by Charles and Pamela-Lamar Dukes with Keith giving an introduction to the debate and Jordan expanding upon his points. Callie Clyde read “„Blurring‟ of Special Education,” by Douglas and Lynn S. Fuchs and Pamela Stecker and explained the point of deriving a lesson plan specifically for students with a disability. Robin Hernandez read “Teachers Working Together,” by Amy Lingo, Sally Barton-Arwood and Kristine Jolviette and talked about the clash between general curriculum and special education teachers. Finally, Brittany Trexler read “Golden of Providing Support,” by Julie Causton- Theoharis and concluded the debate speaking about the effort educators go through in an inclusive classroom. 2. Major points used from articles to support your group’s position. From the article “Inclusion by Design,” the points we added in our position against inclusion involved time, the teacher‟s attitudes and lesson planning. From the article,” „Blurring‟ of Special Education,” the point we found was that special education students need a individualized lesson plan to succeed and the teachers do not have the time to give those students individual attention while also challenging the general education students. From the article, “Teachers Working Together,” we understood that the special education and general education teachers clash and do not collaborate well when planning assignments together. Differentiated instruction focuses on one student and hinders the rest of the classroom. And finally, the last article, “Golden Rule of Providing Support,” we believed that inclusion is invasive and draws undo attention to the student and ostracizes them. This means that paraprofessionals, which can cause unnecessary dependence on adults. There is a loss of personal control of their education. 3. Major counterpoints to your opponents’ arguments used by your group. Those who are for inclusion believe that educators do not want the inclusive classroom because they are “too lazy” to put forth the effort and dedicate themselves to make the appropriate lesson plan necessary for each student. What these people do not understand is that there is an exor
More Less

Related notes for INST 210

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit