残疾青少年接受通识教育课程:神话还是现实?

J. Schumaker, D. Deshler, Janis A. Bulgren, B. Davis, Keith Lenz, Bonnie Grossen
{"title":"残疾青少年接受通识教育课程:神话还是现实?","authors":"J. Schumaker, D. Deshler, Janis A. Bulgren, B. Davis, Keith Lenz, Bonnie Grossen","doi":"10.17161/FOEC.V35I3.6795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As the United States begins to implement the historic No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation, one thing is clear: 6 million of this country's secondary-aged students are in serious danger of being left behind. These young people live in our cities, suburbs, and rural areas and reflect all income levels. Predictably, many of these at-risk students also have a disability. Adolescents with disabilities have found the demands and expectations of high school to be especially stringent, as reflected by the findings of the National Longitudinal Transition Study (Wagner, Blackorby, & Hebbeler, 1993). That study reported that a disproportionate number of students with disabilities (38%) drop out of school ( compared to 25% of the general population). In addition, preceding their decision to drop out of school, students with disabilities generally demonstrate higher rates of absenteeism, lower grade-point averages, and higher course-failure rates than students in the general population (Wagner et al., 1993). In spite of these striking problems presented by the adolescent population in our schools, the vast majority of attention and resources during the past decade have been devoted to increasing early childhood education opportunities and reaching the national goal of making sure that every child possesses basic literacy skills by the third grade. Although these goals are important and laudable, there is a potential danger in overemphasizing early intervention at the expense of interventions for older students-especially those who have reached high school. Specifically, the calls for early intervention efforts may erroneously imply that by providing early intervention, most of the problems presented by students with disabilities will be ameliorated by the time they reach adolescence. Although this is certainly a desired outcome, research has shown that the disabilities of these students persist and continue to affect their learning at older ages as well (Warner, Schumaker, Alley, & Deshler, 1980). Thus, as compelling as the case for early intervention can be, if that case is made at the expense of addressing the equally problematic and unique set of problems presented by older students, the long-term effects of that policy will be devastating for thousands of individuals with disabilities (Deshler, 2002).","PeriodicalId":89924,"journal":{"name":"Focus on exceptional children","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Access of Adolescents with Disabilities to General Education Curriculum: Myth or Reality?.\",\"authors\":\"J. Schumaker, D. Deshler, Janis A. Bulgren, B. Davis, Keith Lenz, Bonnie Grossen\",\"doi\":\"10.17161/FOEC.V35I3.6795\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As the United States begins to implement the historic No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation, one thing is clear: 6 million of this country's secondary-aged students are in serious danger of being left behind. These young people live in our cities, suburbs, and rural areas and reflect all income levels. Predictably, many of these at-risk students also have a disability. Adolescents with disabilities have found the demands and expectations of high school to be especially stringent, as reflected by the findings of the National Longitudinal Transition Study (Wagner, Blackorby, & Hebbeler, 1993). That study reported that a disproportionate number of students with disabilities (38%) drop out of school ( compared to 25% of the general population). In addition, preceding their decision to drop out of school, students with disabilities generally demonstrate higher rates of absenteeism, lower grade-point averages, and higher course-failure rates than students in the general population (Wagner et al., 1993). In spite of these striking problems presented by the adolescent population in our schools, the vast majority of attention and resources during the past decade have been devoted to increasing early childhood education opportunities and reaching the national goal of making sure that every child possesses basic literacy skills by the third grade. Although these goals are important and laudable, there is a potential danger in overemphasizing early intervention at the expense of interventions for older students-especially those who have reached high school. Specifically, the calls for early intervention efforts may erroneously imply that by providing early intervention, most of the problems presented by students with disabilities will be ameliorated by the time they reach adolescence. Although this is certainly a desired outcome, research has shown that the disabilities of these students persist and continue to affect their learning at older ages as well (Warner, Schumaker, Alley, & Deshler, 1980). Thus, as compelling as the case for early intervention can be, if that case is made at the expense of addressing the equally problematic and unique set of problems presented by older students, the long-term effects of that policy will be devastating for thousands of individuals with disabilities (Deshler, 2002).\",\"PeriodicalId\":89924,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Focus on exceptional children\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Focus on exceptional children\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17161/FOEC.V35I3.6795\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Focus on exceptional children","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17161/FOEC.V35I3.6795","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

随着美国开始实施历史性的“不让一个孩子掉队”立法,有一件事是明确的:该国600万中学生面临被掉队的严重危险。这些年轻人生活在我们的城市、郊区和农村地区,反映了所有的收入水平。不出所料,这些高危学生中的许多人也有残疾。正如国家纵向过渡研究(Wagner,Blackorby,&Hebbeller,1993)的结果所反映的那样,残疾青少年发现对高中的要求和期望特别严格。该研究报告称,辍学的残疾学生人数不成比例(38%)(而普通人口的比例为25%)。此外,残疾学生在决定辍学之前,通常表现出比普通人群学生更高的旷课率、更低的平均绩点和更高的课程失败率(Wagner等人,1993年)。尽管我国学校中的青少年人口存在这些突出问题,但在过去十年中,绝大多数注意力和资源都集中在增加幼儿教育机会和实现确保每个儿童在三年级时都具备基本识字技能的国家目标上。尽管这些目标很重要,值得称赞,但过分强调早期干预,而牺牲对年龄较大学生的干预,尤其是那些已经上高中的学生,存在潜在的危险。具体而言,呼吁早期干预可能错误地暗示,通过提供早期干预,残疾学生面临的大多数问题将在他们进入青春期时得到改善。尽管这肯定是一个理想的结果,但研究表明,这些学生的残疾仍然存在,并继续影响他们在老年时的学习(Warner,Schumacker,Alley,&Deshler,1980)。因此,尽管早期干预的理由很有说服力,但如果以解决年长学生提出的同样有问题和独特的一系列问题为代价进行干预,该政策的长期影响将对成千上万的残疾人造成毁灭性影响(Deshler,2002)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Access of Adolescents with Disabilities to General Education Curriculum: Myth or Reality?.
As the United States begins to implement the historic No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation, one thing is clear: 6 million of this country's secondary-aged students are in serious danger of being left behind. These young people live in our cities, suburbs, and rural areas and reflect all income levels. Predictably, many of these at-risk students also have a disability. Adolescents with disabilities have found the demands and expectations of high school to be especially stringent, as reflected by the findings of the National Longitudinal Transition Study (Wagner, Blackorby, & Hebbeler, 1993). That study reported that a disproportionate number of students with disabilities (38%) drop out of school ( compared to 25% of the general population). In addition, preceding their decision to drop out of school, students with disabilities generally demonstrate higher rates of absenteeism, lower grade-point averages, and higher course-failure rates than students in the general population (Wagner et al., 1993). In spite of these striking problems presented by the adolescent population in our schools, the vast majority of attention and resources during the past decade have been devoted to increasing early childhood education opportunities and reaching the national goal of making sure that every child possesses basic literacy skills by the third grade. Although these goals are important and laudable, there is a potential danger in overemphasizing early intervention at the expense of interventions for older students-especially those who have reached high school. Specifically, the calls for early intervention efforts may erroneously imply that by providing early intervention, most of the problems presented by students with disabilities will be ameliorated by the time they reach adolescence. Although this is certainly a desired outcome, research has shown that the disabilities of these students persist and continue to affect their learning at older ages as well (Warner, Schumaker, Alley, & Deshler, 1980). Thus, as compelling as the case for early intervention can be, if that case is made at the expense of addressing the equally problematic and unique set of problems presented by older students, the long-term effects of that policy will be devastating for thousands of individuals with disabilities (Deshler, 2002).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信