In situations like the you one described, I really can’t think of any benefit to the students in being mainstreamed. Unable to communicate and their special ed assistants were the ones who did the work and took the tests? That falls into the ridiculous column.
I would think that most people understand that not all special needs students have that level of disability and certainly those who can be mainstreamed, should be. But the ones who insist on all special needs students being mainstreamed are not being realistic.
In a recent discussion about this, after I had stated my position that: children who were in the country illegally and who couldn’t speak English, students who were chronic discipline problems, and special needs students who couldn’t be mainstreamed without detriment to the non-disabled students should not be in public school classrooms with regular students, the person pointedly asked if I was talking about segregation. I responded that if she was defining as segregation what I just described, then yes. If she was using the word pejoratively to compare it to what was addressed in Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954, then no, she was wrong and it was most definitely not the same thing.
Peach
Mainstreaming children typically denies their unique needs. It realy is that simple. The most disturbing example of this trend on public education is evidenced by a shocking increase in the incidence of autistic children. It has created a public education nightmare.
While these children are young public schools are able to control their behavior without providing the services that will help them overcome their disability. As they become older and more unruly they can no longer be handled in a public school setting and eventually many become institutionalized.
My daughter and a few other sturdy souls are developing programs for these young children that allow them to become effectively mainstreamed as adolescents. Without intensive and appropriate training early on that is not possible.
Tragically public school systems are possessive of their budgets and are unwilling to place these young children in special settings where they will get the help they need. Not until it is too late to help and the child is irretrievably damaged will the public schools admit their failure and be forced to pay for institutional care.
We welcome Betsy DeVos with the prayer that the real needs of real children will be addressed without the bias of public institutions providing minimal services to keep their budgets fat.