I was very recently in the middle of a debate about how reasonable it is to expect teachers to make adjustments to accommodate the needs of students with disability. It isn’t a new debate. On the one hand, we have staff who are clued in to the needs of students with disabilities. We know that it is possible to support these students if we identify the most suitable adjustments, in consultation with parents, students and other stakeholders. We know that by supporting teachers in the classroom to establish these accommodations, students can be supported to learn about themselves and reach high goals. We have seen this success. Some students we case manage need more than others and yet, many can learn.
On the other hand, there are teachers who do not understand why “these students” are in their classroom. “These students” are not their job. Their job is to teach – and “these students” interrupt the flow with their constant call for attention. This is one extreme. And of course, there are the teachers – justifiably – who are just exhausted by the amount of work this accommodation to needs can sometimes take.
Firstly, let me state, categorically, that a teacher’s job is not to just teach. It is to ensure students learn. Often, through the latter groups’ debating angle, comes statements like – I have to teach all these other students. If one student doesn’t do what I tell them to do, the whole class will break down. The implied belief is that if the student doesn’t fit the mould – well – the student shouldn’t be there. I know I make it sound so simplistic – and I can already feel the tensed muscles of disapproval. But hear me out.
Every child deserves an education. Every child deserves the right to be educated with their peers if they so desire. Every child is not the same. So the question here is not whether these students should be in your classroom. If they are, differentiation must be made to accommodate their needs. This might mean that after giving a whole class instruction- “write your names on the paper, kids”, you notice that little Johnny is more keen to look through the activity first. One teacher response might be to sternly warn, “I told you to write your name!”. A valid response from a teacher who is focussed on the teacher actions. Another response might be, “Johnny, the instruction is to write your name. I’ll come back in a few minutes and see if you need help doing that.” The teacher then praises Mary in the seat behind – “good job writing in your name, Mary”. And comes back to Johnny a few minutes later to check if more support is needed. This is a series of actions, doesn’t take more than a few minutes – yet focuses on the student’s needs – their learning needs.
Did I mention that this was a student with autism? Shouldn’t really matter – because kids sometimes have off days. But yes, this kid has autism, and the discussion that I was having centred on some teachers’s belief that the parent, who was requesting accommodations – because her child escalated in the classroom after the more teacher-centred interaction, and had been suspended – the belief of some of the staff was that the parent was being unreasonable in expecting the staff to see their child’s perspective.
What got me really, in this situation, was how this didn’t require very much “differentiation” on the part of the teacher. As a HOD of Inclusion – I have seen behaviours that are much more visible and difficult manifestations of the needs of some students. I understand the trauma that comes from teachers having to deal with some very difficult behaviours in the classroom. And for sure, the supports that have been established in schools are not always generous enough to show the teacher’s needs are valued.
However, we need to ensure that we do not react against all the behaviours we see in the classroom as if they are all the same. 90% of students with a disability, with support engineered through clear plans, strong case management and leadership support, can be supported well. I have seen tons of these kids described above who have been successful in the classroom. I would say this student that was being discussed earlier definitely fell into that 90%.
That child did not deserve the flippant disregard given him and his parent. There is a more legitimate debate that must be had about the quality of support given teachers in the classroom, and this child should not be collateral from that debate.
Share your thoughts!