Philosophy of Special Education

Nouns dominate the English language. Every person, place, or thing is a noun. The standard sentence structure in English is NOUN + VERB. The first words we encourage our children to speak are nouns: Momma, Poppa. We are a noun-centered culture. But what is a noun, really? It isn’t the person, Momma, who is a noun. The term noun doesn’t really refer to the things around us, it refers to the names we give those things. One’s Momma isn’t a noun, the word, Momma, is a noun. The concept of noun is a grammatical, language construct. In other words, our world is made up if things, and the names we give them are nouns. Without these linguistic identifications, or labels, we would have no means of identifying what things are or what their relationship to the world is.
While general noun-names serve to give a general identification of a thing in our world, the more specific the name, the more we know about the thing. To call something a person tells us something about that thing. To call it a woman tells us a little more. To call it a mother tells us even more, but to call it Momma tells us the most. These names, or labels, help us make sense of a large and sometimes confusing universe. Our minds are designed to categorize things in an effort to make sense of the world around us. This is why names are so important and why labels such as person, woman, mother, or Momma are so vital in our culture. The simple one word label “Momma” is able to convey so much more information than the label “woman”. The same is true of labeling other things in our world: genre of literature, animals, food, cultures, and learning styles or abilities.
In education, just as in other aspects of the world, labeling is necessary. Teachers have so much they need to know about their classes in general and their students in particular that lables are required if teachers are to make sense of their kids and be able to serve them adequately. Some labels are self-evident and therefore are rarely seen as labeling. In a classroom that sits in rows, a teacher might identify a shorter student and put him in the front so that he can be sure to see the board. By the same token, taller students might be seated in the back to avoid their blocking the view of others. The teacher has labeled the students, and they have been treated accordingly. Additionally, a student who wears glasses might be seated near the front, and one who talks too much with his best friend might be separated from that friend. All of these students have been identified, labeled, and treated according to their labels. Because the teacher has been able to label these students, even if it is only in her understanding of them and not on an official document, he or she has been able to create an image of these students in her mind and is able to place them into her world. The same is true of special education labels.
In special education, labels are used to convey books-worth of information about a student in a single word or phrase. While these labels don’t tell the teacher everything there is to know about a student, as Siders (2009) points out, they “…can help them plan on how to best educate that child”. Labeling a child as having dyslexia, for example, gives the teacher tools similar to the one she has when she can identify a child has shorter or taller than most. She has a frame of reference and is less likely to be caught of guard by a problem. By the same token, having a child in a class who is labeled as TAG also helps the teacher understand some things about the student before the year begins. In a school environment where teachers are expected to cater to every academic need, challenge, or deficiency, as well as act as counselor, mandatory reporter, referee, janitor, student, judge, jury, and at the same time make sure everyone passes the test or risk getting fired, any advanced clue teachers can get is a must. The problem lies in when these labels are either misused or overused, and the identity of the student as a whole gets ignored or maligned because of the label. Snow (2005) reminds of this when she reiterates, “Children in school are students and some receive special services” (p.3).
The role of special education and special education teachers goes well beyond the defining and assigning of labels. The purpose of special education is to give support to students who need more support than is generally available in the traditional classroom. This support can take the form of one-on-one attention, modifications, special technologies or tools, or a number of other methods that may not be immediately obvious as alternatives to the untrained regular classroom teacher. The role of special education is not in “fixing” the child or the disability or learning difficulty but, as Hehir (2005) writes, it is in “giving students the supports, skills, and opportunities needed to live as full a life as possible with their disability” (11). Additionally, the special education faculty and staff are available to help the classroom teacher address the needs of the students in special education within the confines of an inclusion classroom. Special educators are not babysitters. They are professionals with specific expertise that can be applied to all learners but are particularly useful for students who have not been successful in a more traditional setting. While the role of special educators is to identify methods and tools needed to help these students succeed, it is the role of the school, as those responsible for educating our children, to implement these recommendations and to ensure everything is being done to help all students learn.
In my opinion, the future of special education is emerging now. A major aspect of this future includes RTI (Response to Intervention). At long last, education is realizing that most students need some academic support at one time or another, but that does not necessarily mean that most students require full-time support as provided by traditional special education methods of identification, labeling, and servicing. By implementing RTI at all levels of education, children with mild difficulties can be helped without the need for lengthy identification processes. Students with moderate or more severe disabilities can be helped within the regular classroom setting and before they have fallen significantly behind. School communities that have successfully made RTI routine can not only help children already diagnosed with learning disabilities but can also provide support for other struggling students in a non-stigmatized manner and before the problems become monumental. RTI has become increasingly feasible because, according to Harry and Klingner (2007), recent laws enable “schools to spend 15 percent of special education funds on early intervention services” (p.21). Additionally, by keeping more of the mild to moderately learning diabled students in the inclusion classroom, more resources can be dedicated to students whose needs are more profound.
As a secondary English teacher who is earning her MAT in special education, I see my goals as going in one of at least two directions. As a special education teacher, my goal will be to help all students in my care achieve to the best of their abilities, even if their abilities are greater than presumed or evidenced by test results or past performances. Furthermore, as the special education liaison within an inclusion team, it will be my job to help the classroom teachers on my team to use all methods at our disposal to help not only the special education identified students, but all students within our team. Together, the regular classroom teachers and I will work with parents and students to make sure everyone understands the difficulties, goals, and methodologies unique to each student.
As a regular secondary English teacher with special education training, I see different goals on my horizon. Since I will be highly qualified in both English and special education, I will be in a position to have a unique impact on my regular and special education identified students. As a regular classroom teacher, I will be on the front line when it comes to identifying possible difficulties. Because of my special education training, I will be better equipped than many classroom teachers to address these difficulties before referring the students for evaluation. Additionally, when these students are recommended for evaluation, I will be well versed in the jargon of special education, and as a result, I may be more able to explain my concerns to parents and evaluators. Once students have been identified and are receiving services, my background in special education will make implementing modifications into my lesson plans easier than it may be for other teachers. Also, I hope that my special education background will make teaming with special education teachers easier, and it may even serve to lighten the loads of these teachers so they can dedicate more time to the students whose classroom teachers may be less confident in their support of students with learning disabilities.
All children can learn. What, how much, and how quickly are distinctions that are unique to each child. Traditional education has ignored this and has focused on education all children to one standard. Students that cannot meet this standard according to a traditional matrix have been largely ignore and marginalized. Special education strives to de-marginalize students who do not meet the standard expectations. This is not to say that special education students are incapable of meeting expectations. Instead, according to Sapon-Shevin (2007) special education strives to assure that “Differences…are not dismissed in the name of standardization, but rather are appreciated and become part of the curriculum itself” (p. 37). Special education can be said to exist to remind all educators that all students are special, and all students can be educated.












Reference Page

Harry, Beth, & Klingner, Janette (2007). Discarding the Deficit Model. Educational
Leadership, February, 16-21.

Sapon-Shevin, Mara (2007). Widening the Circle: The Power of Inclusion Classrooms.
Boston, MA: Beacon Publishing.

Siders, Kaye (2009). Special Education Labels: Necessary or Negative? Retrieved
April 9, 2009, from www.associatedcontent.com/pop_print.shtml.

Snow, Kathie (2005). People First Language. Revised September, 2005, on
www.disabilityisnatural.com.