> Deri Wrote,

> 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
Dearest Sir Deri,

I think what has happened in the US came with a phrase known as "least
restrictive environment", that was held up as that holy grail you mention,
the era of mainsteaming.
Hope I can explain what I mean.
 If there was a child with a disability, the optimum placement for him,
would be in a classroom that didn't look like the old Sp. Ed. classrooms of
the 60s and 70s (e.g.--special education kids were NOT SEEN in the regular
local school building--and if they were, it was only at lunchtime when they
were "brought out"). Basically the pendulum swung to the extreme (which is
the typical American educational system way--and yes, it does come full
circle quickly). What is happening now is that many kids with disabilities
are in regular classrooms all day long with an intervention specialist (we
used to be called classroom teachers). So what has happened is many parents
see this as their child getting to be "normal" with the "normal kids", so
many demand this kind of education for their kids. And for some, it is  a
fabulous fit--the kids are successful and productive and that is where
they should be.
For other kids it is a dismal failure. They don't get services required,
they aren't making friends with their "normal" peers, and struggle with the
demands of the regular classroom teacher.
Basically, what I saw happening was a trend towards a one-size fits-all
approach to Sp. Ed. and the benefit of serving the child's individual needs
was lost
(despite having a detailed IEP).

Kind of missing those Sp.Ed. middle schoolers!
Laura
3yr. stay at home mom--14 yr. Sp.ed. Veteran--and loved it--yes,even those
midlle school nuckleheads