Quote:
Originally Posted by WinnipegFan
This isn't the issue, you are simply approaching this from a polarized side of the argument. Inclusion took place before the UCP existed. The UCP underfunded it but the philosophy and practice cae before them.
My argument is even funded properly, inclusion is a failing philosophy. I taught adn witnessed kids in specialized settings flourish, become incredible leaders in a context where they could. The same kids, exactly the same as it happened over one summer, after inclusion, lasted 3-4 weeks in the new school and dropped out.
They are the unseen victims of inclusion. It forces kide into a culture and context where they will never have a chance to be leaders or achieve at a level that makes them prooud. To argue otherwise is simply pandering to the egos of parents that don't want ot accept their kids need help.
|
Yes, that is the abandonment part that the UCP is embracing so hard.
I am good with killing the "inclusive classroom", I think the intention should be to have an inclusive education system with diverse programs designed to help kids and kids should be place in those programs based on evaluations (as opposed to their parent's demanding that their little snowflake get put into the class of their choosing that might not actually be a good fit for the kid).
It has been mentioned a few times here already that the existing system does have non-standard program offerings but they are always full. If those programs are always full then they should allocate more money to expanding their capacity (which ultimately goes back to the government funding the system properly).