As I searched articles related to labeling special education students, the word “exceptional” quite frequently popped up. The definitions of the word exceptional are as follows: “unusual: not typical” or “unusually good, outstanding.” (Merriam Webster Dictionary) So as the textbook states, an individual dubbed as “exceptional” doesn’t necessarily require a special education. Both ends of the “exceptional” spectrum can be accommodated in general education classrooms. Don’t get me wrong however, there are certainly instances that individuals need extra, distinct help in order to learn. But the article “Gifted Ed. is Crucial, But the Label Isn’t” gives a new outlook in a different policy for advanced students that I believe can be used for special education students as well.
The article goes beyond the label of “gifted” and further into the more important factors of unmet academic needs and intervention. As special education deals with issues of adequate attention and levels of instruction, advanced education fights for the same equality. However, in some instances, I believe classrooms, with both special needs students, could be adjusted to satisfy the two and the rest of the class. Rather than focusing on proficiency, schools are now emphasizing on a growth-base model. Which in retrospect, allows the special education students a more challenging setting because it’s not necessarily their educational level but rather their ability to learn and improve that is now important. I believe students can only really grow if they are pushed to their highest capacity. For both labels of “gifted” and disabled, that aspect is disregarded. In both standpoints, individuals are presumed to achieve and act to a certain level and not necessarily credited for according to their improvement. The three steps listed in the article in order to make sure the focus is on the right education model, growth-based over a proficiency-based, are as follows: the educators must identify the academic needs that are not met by the certain program, approach the students appropriately about these potential unmet needs, and finally locating all the students that might fall under these categories. Once the levels are established and students uncovered, the classroom lessons can begin to mold around each students needs in a fitting manner.
All in all, the idea and setting created by labels do not just negatively affect individuals of special education needs; labels affect students of all educational levels and abilities. Labels only separate the two different students when the two groups can be intertwined in everyday classwork, benefitting the students and teachers involved. While it is necessary to remove some students with ultimately special needs that aren’t comfortable and enroll them in a program that will benefit their levels, it shouldn’t always be the case or easy way out for the faculty and staff of a school.
Ardita Ajvazi
The article goes beyond the label of “gifted” and further into the more important factors of unmet academic needs and intervention. As special education deals with issues of adequate attention and levels of instruction, advanced education fights for the same equality. However, in some instances, I believe classrooms, with both special needs students, could be adjusted to satisfy the two and the rest of the class. Rather than focusing on proficiency, schools are now emphasizing on a growth-base model. Which in retrospect, allows the special education students a more challenging setting because it’s not necessarily their educational level but rather their ability to learn and improve that is now important. I believe students can only really grow if they are pushed to their highest capacity. For both labels of “gifted” and disabled, that aspect is disregarded. In both standpoints, individuals are presumed to achieve and act to a certain level and not necessarily credited for according to their improvement. The three steps listed in the article in order to make sure the focus is on the right education model, growth-based over a proficiency-based, are as follows: the educators must identify the academic needs that are not met by the certain program, approach the students appropriately about these potential unmet needs, and finally locating all the students that might fall under these categories. Once the levels are established and students uncovered, the classroom lessons can begin to mold around each students needs in a fitting manner.
All in all, the idea and setting created by labels do not just negatively affect individuals of special education needs; labels affect students of all educational levels and abilities. Labels only separate the two different students when the two groups can be intertwined in everyday classwork, benefitting the students and teachers involved. While it is necessary to remove some students with ultimately special needs that aren’t comfortable and enroll them in a program that will benefit their levels, it shouldn’t always be the case or easy way out for the faculty and staff of a school.
Ardita Ajvazi
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/04/16/28peters_ep.h33.html