There is extensive discussion on the quality of education and support for individuals with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD) in relation to inclusion and full citizenship. The discussions are complicated because of differences or lack of clarity in the description of the variations and types of PIMD. A description of the core group is offered, but it is also argued that there cannot be an absolute separation of this specific target group from other adjoining groups. The authors propose a multi‐axial model‐based taxonomy that distinguishes visual and/or auditory impairments, other physical impairments, and mental health problems, in addition to the two key defining characteristics (limited intellect and compromised physical functions). The authors also propose that assessment of people with PIMD be structured toward ascertainment of diagnostic objectives (e.g., confirming or disconfirming the person’s level of intellectual disability) and the determination of a starting point and direction for support of the individual. They conclude that, to prevent misunderstanding in comparison of results of educational programs and interventions, it is recommended that workers describe individuals (or subgroups) with PIMD in publications in detail—using operational definitions. In addition, they propose that an international effort be undertaken to develop and use generally agreed assessment procedures.
Maximizing the interaction between pupils with and without special needs is generally considered an important aspect of inclusion. However, it is frequently questioned whether pupils with special educational needs (SEN) in regular classrooms have interactions and friendships with their peers. In order to be able to evaluate these relationships, it is necessary to clarify concepts such as social participation, social integration and social inclusion. At the moment there is much ambiguity regarding these concepts. This article aims to elucidate on these concepts and reveal its characteristic themes. An analysis of literature was carried out to identify these concepts. In the final analysis, 62 articles were included. This analysis showed that the concept social integration and the related concepts of social inclusion and social participation are often described inaccurately, with only a few researchers providing explicit definitions or descriptions. In the majority of articles, implicit descriptions can be derived from instruments used to measure social integration, social inclusion or social participation: it is apparent there is much overlap among the use of concepts by researchers. Based on the analysis of the 62 articles, it can be concluded that the concepts social integration, social inclusion and social participation are used as synonyms. In our opinion, social participation is the most suitable concept. The analysis of literature reveals four key themes central to all three concepts: friendships/relationships, interactions/contacts, perception of the pupil with SEN and acceptance by classmates.
This study addresses the social participation of young students (Grades One to Three) with special needs in regular Dutch primary schools. More specifically, the focus lies on four key themes related to social participation: friendships/relationships, contacts/ interactions, students' social self-perception, and acceptance by classmates. The outcomes of the study revealed that the majority of students with special needs have a satisfactory degree of social participation. However, compared with students without special needs, a relatively large portion of the students with special needs experience difficulties in their social participation. In general, students with special needs have a significantly lower number of friends and are members of a cohesive subgroup less often than their typical peers. In addition, students with special needs have fewer interactions with classmates, have more interactions with the teacher, and are less accepted than students without special needs. The social self-perception of both groups of students does not differ. A comparison between students with different categories of disability regarding the four themes of social participation revealed no significant differences.
Since 1999, one of the Special Interest Research Groups within the International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual Disabilities (IASSID) has been on profound multiple disabilities (PMD). This group has stimulated a world‐wide discussion on education and support for such individuals. However, it is evident that there is some disagreement about who is included in this category. There has also been a debate about the applicability of various policy changes for people with PMD. A third topic of discussion has been the need for more research related to this target group and the related research priorities. This paper profiles and discusses these questions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.