In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com (Herman Rubin) writes: >In article <329A513D.310F@con2.com>, Lou Goldstein <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >>I agree that it is frustrating when some children lose their opportunity >>to learn in order to help someone else. But let's not be so cavalier >>about deciding whose opportunity to sacrifice. If your child were the >>one being locked away and deprived of the opportunity to reach her full >>potential, you might not be so willing to have special ed kids settle >>for education in the (limited) skills that will gear them for their >>(limited) role in society. > >Nobody is suggesting that children lose their opportunity to learn. >But anyone who cannot recognize that children with different abilities >and preparation should not be learning in the same manner and at the >same rate just because they are the same age is ignorant, stupid, or >a Marxist social engineer type. > > .............. > >>Beyond that, if you wish to persuade the public that inclusion is a bad >>idea, it is incumbent upon you to come up with an alternative strategy >>that meets statutory and constitutional requirements of equity, > >I suggest we get rid of most of the statutory stupidity; children are >not of equal ability. There are no Constitutional requirements for >children of different abilities to be in the same classroom. > >allows >>those special ed students who have the capacity to do so to learn as >>much as their regular ed peers, > >I would like to see EVERYONE who places children by age removed from >the serious business of teaching. A genius and someone with limited >mental capacity should not be in the same classroom, and neither of >them should be in the same classroom with "normal" children. Even >normal children are sufficiently varied to require different educational >programs. > >and gives special ed students the social >>exposure and acceptance they need in order to become full and equal >>participants in society. But don't just throw them out of the regular >>ed classroom and leave them stigmatized, marginally-educated, and out of >>sight. > >If two children do not have sufficiently similar "smarts" that their >individual optimal rate of progression in a given subject are close >to equal, they should not progress in the same manner. If a school >cannot do this, it does not deserve the title of educational. >-- >Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399 >email@example.com Phone: (317)494-6054 FAX: (317)494-0558
I have not read these newsgroups for some time, but seem to remember some good math-related advice from Prof. Rubin. I am now glad he added these pedagogical comments. I couldn't agree more...and as a parent who has had to fight the social engineering educational establishment (read: public ed. BOEs!!!!) for years.