Does categorical special education make sense? The Flemish special education system in the international debate

P. Ghesquière, A. Ruijssenaars
{"title":"Does categorical special education make sense? The Flemish special education system in the international debate","authors":"P. Ghesquière, A. Ruijssenaars","doi":"10.1179/096979598799156047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Flanders more than 4% of the pupils in primary education are going to special schools for mildly mentally handicapped children (MMH-schools, 9.915 pupils, 2.4%) and to special schools for children with (serious) learning disabilities (LD-school, 8.029 pupils, 1.9%) (Ministry of the Flemish Community, 1996). The theoretical and practical arguments for the distinction that is made between these two groups of children with learning problems, the nature of which is cognitive (there is, for instance, no sensory or motoric deficiency), are frequently under discussion and have, of course, implications for policy. For reasons of economy investigations are made as to the possibilities of integrating the different types of schools (costcutting through scaling-up) and preventing the growth of special education (costcutting through preventive measures, such as broadening care in regular schools). At the moment the first approach is especially advocated in the Netherlands. An example of the latter method is found in Flanders as well, inter alia in the strategy that has been developed in the project ‘Help in learning’ by the Federation for Vocational Guidance (C.B.S.O.) and the K.U. Leuven (University of Leuven). For a number of years some forty educational psychologists and special educationists have set up or have given themselves individual remediation in primary schools. One of the chief objectives is to advance the quality of diagnosis and to advise in such a way, that when problems arise, the solution is found preferably in the pupil’s own school. (Ghesquière et al., 1997a; Ghesquière, et al., 1997b). In this contribution we will deal with the different arguments and reasons for justification of the existing situation and define our own position. To do so, we will subsequently go deeper into the definition of the problem, discuss various definitions that are the basis of current practice and deal with the problems that are related to categorical special education. After some discussion we will reach a conclusion.","PeriodicalId":411791,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Developmental Disabilities","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Developmental Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1179/096979598799156047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In Flanders more than 4% of the pupils in primary education are going to special schools for mildly mentally handicapped children (MMH-schools, 9.915 pupils, 2.4%) and to special schools for children with (serious) learning disabilities (LD-school, 8.029 pupils, 1.9%) (Ministry of the Flemish Community, 1996). The theoretical and practical arguments for the distinction that is made between these two groups of children with learning problems, the nature of which is cognitive (there is, for instance, no sensory or motoric deficiency), are frequently under discussion and have, of course, implications for policy. For reasons of economy investigations are made as to the possibilities of integrating the different types of schools (costcutting through scaling-up) and preventing the growth of special education (costcutting through preventive measures, such as broadening care in regular schools). At the moment the first approach is especially advocated in the Netherlands. An example of the latter method is found in Flanders as well, inter alia in the strategy that has been developed in the project ‘Help in learning’ by the Federation for Vocational Guidance (C.B.S.O.) and the K.U. Leuven (University of Leuven). For a number of years some forty educational psychologists and special educationists have set up or have given themselves individual remediation in primary schools. One of the chief objectives is to advance the quality of diagnosis and to advise in such a way, that when problems arise, the solution is found preferably in the pupil’s own school. (Ghesquière et al., 1997a; Ghesquière, et al., 1997b). In this contribution we will deal with the different arguments and reasons for justification of the existing situation and define our own position. To do so, we will subsequently go deeper into the definition of the problem, discuss various definitions that are the basis of current practice and deal with the problems that are related to categorical special education. After some discussion we will reach a conclusion.
分类特殊教育有意义吗?佛兰德特殊教育制度在国际上争论不休
在佛兰德斯,接受小学教育的学生中有4%以上在轻度弱智儿童的特殊学校(mmh学校,9.915名学生,2.4%)和(严重)学习障碍儿童的特殊学校(ld学校,8.029名学生,1.9%)就读(佛兰德社区部,1996年)。这两组有学习问题的儿童的本质是认知问题(例如,没有感觉或运动缺陷),对这两组儿童进行区分的理论和实践论证经常被讨论,当然也会对政策产生影响。出于经济原因,对整合不同类型的学校(通过扩大规模削减成本)和防止特殊教育增长的可能性进行了调查(通过预防性措施,如扩大普通学校的照顾范围来削减成本)。目前,荷兰特别提倡第一种方法。后一种方法的一个例子也可以在佛兰德斯找到,其中包括职业指导联合会和鲁汶大学在“帮助学习”项目中制定的战略。多年来,大约有40位教育心理学家和特殊教育学家在小学开设了或为他们自己提供了个别辅导。其中一个主要目标是提高诊断的质量,并以这样一种方式提出建议,即当问题出现时,最好在学生自己的学校找到解决方案。(ghesqui等,1997a;ghesqui等人,1997年b)。在这篇文章中,我们将讨论为现有情况辩护的不同论点和理由,并确定我们自己的立场。为此,我们随后将深入探讨问题的定义,讨论作为当前实践基础的各种定义,并处理与绝对特殊教育相关的问题。经过一番讨论,我们将得出结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信