Betty Alfred <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I am intensely curious.  I have formed the opinion that more
> seriously disabled children who are mainstreamed often get
> thrown in regular classrooms and forgotten, so to speak.  Am I
> on target in my assumption?
>
>
> In a message dated 06/08/2000 8:27:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> > Sometimes, I think it is better to go to SP Ed school that
> > has excellent
> >  teachers, than to one of our many real bad regular schools.
> >
>
>
Quality of education is directly proportional to the amount of
resources which society deems appropriate to put into it. It
should be obvious that if a child attends a school where the
class sizes are less than 10 and the teacher has 3 or 4 helpers,
and that teacher has been trained appropriately, then they will
receive a "better" education than attending a main stream school
where the class sizes are closer to 30.

Society will never agree to fund this level of education in main
stream schools - everyone wants low taxes - but it could afford
this level of education (and better) in Special Ed schools. I am
not talking about Special Ed within mainstream, I mean purpose
built schools equipped and staffed for the purpose of educating
the disabled.

Of course, education at this level would not be "local", many
would need boarding places, which is a terrible wrench for you
Mums and Dads, but is a great start on the road to independence.

I do not understand the "holy grail" of mainstreaming, why do you
see it as an advantage (and that's not aimed at you Betty, but
all the posters who see a stigma attached to Special Ed).

Cheers

--
Deri James