This article provides an overview of key issues pertinent to an inclusive approach to the education of deaf students in order to establish a context for interpreting and integrating the articles in this issue. It discusses definitions of inclusion, integration, and mainstreaming from placement-related, philosophical, and pragmatic perspectives. The article provides demographic information pertinent to an inclusive approach. It also compares perspectives on inclusion in the general field of special education with those in the education of deaf and hard-of-hearing students. It considers the challenges of using an inclusive approach to achieve academic and social integration of students, as based on research on the learning and adjustment of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in regular classes. The article concludes with an overview of the topics addressed in the issue.
The education of the deaf in the United States is every bit as diverse as is American education itself (Moores, 1996, Stewart & Kluwin, 2000). Today, a deaf or hard-of-hearing child could find herself in a public, private, or parochial school, in a residential program, or in a day program. A teacher of the deaf could spend his entire career in one school in a small town or ride the subway in a big city from one school to another. This diversity in part reflects the continuum of types of educational placement available in the United States today. This continuum is important because individual deaf students have different levels of need for support (Schirmer, 2001). The term “deaf ” will be used here to refer to the full range of deaf and hard-of-hearing students who receive special educational services.). This chapter discusses the following four categories of alternative placements: (a) separate schools, (b) resource rooms and separate classes, (c) general education classes, and (d) co-enrollment classes. Two questions that immediately occur regarding these options are: “What are the differences in the experiences of students in these alternative placement types?” “What are the differences in the characteristics and attainments of students in these placement types?” A more complex question isasks “Is it possible to relate these different educational experiences to characteristics and attainments of the students?” That is, do different experiences produce different educational consequences? The second and third sections of this chapter consider the research that best answers these questions. The first section provides background, description, and conceptualization that aids understanding of the research that this chapter reviews and of thinking in the field in regard to alternative types of placement.
This article discusses the importance of membership in the inclusive education of deaf/hard-of-hearing (D/HH) students. Membership refers to being an integral part of the classroom and school communities. Membership is a key philosophical concept in inclusion that may influence how classroom teachers and teachers of D/HH students share their expertise and how they work with students and each other. Membership can be contrasted with "visitorship." When programs treat D/HH students as visitors, these students face greater barriers to obtaining a quality education in classes with hearing students. A social constructivist perspective of learning and teaching that requires students in the classroom to interact with one another and the teacher may best promote learning and is consistent with a focus on membership. We suggest that inclusion is possible, but to sustain students as full members of their classes and school, programs must go beyond placement and communication access issues. To facilitate membership, inclusive programs must carefully address teacher attitudes, teacher roles and relationships, student knowledge and curriculum, structural barriers, extracurricular activities, community relationships, and parental support.
Les pratiques d'entrevues d'enquête au Canada devraient faire l'objet d'une réforme importante. La formation sur les entrevues avec des témoins et des victimes adultes, qui est offerte aux agents de police canadiens, est souvent superficielle et celle sur l'interrogation de suspects se limite à la controversée technique Reid. Cela pose problème parce que les enquêteurs risquent ainsi de ne pas maximiser la quantité ni la qualité des renseignements obtenus des personnes interrogées. Dans l'article, on décrit la méthode PEACE, un modèle d'interrogatoire inquisitorial jugé à la fois éthique et fondé sur la recherche scientifique. Pour réussir cette réforme des pratiques d'entrevues d'enquête, il faudrait mettre en place un modèle national standardisé qui serait basé sur le modèle PEACE et qui augmenterait les partenariats entre utilisateurs et théoriciens. Mots clés : entrevues d'enquête, technique Reid, modèle PEACE, faux aveux, témoins, suspectsInvestigative interviewing practices in Canada require substantive reform. Adult witness and victim interview training for Canadian police officers is often cursory, and suspect interview training is limited to the much-maligned Reid technique. This state of affairs is troublesome because interviewers may not be maximizing the quality and quantity of information that can be retrieved from interviewees. An inquisitorial interviewing method, known as PEACE, that is ethical and grounded in scientific research is outlined. Investigative interviewing reform can best be achieved through the implementation 6 2010 CJCCJ/RCCJP doi:10.3138/cjccj.52.2.215of a standardized national model that is based on PEACE and through increased practitioner-academic partnerships.
This project identified key issues concerning participation of deaf and hard-of-hearing (D/HH) students in regular (mainstream) classes. In one study, qualitative data were collected from 40 participants in focus groups consisting of interpreters, teachers of the deaf, and notetakers. In a second study, repeated field observations were made of four elementary-level D/HH students who were participating in small-group learning activities with hearing classmates. Focus group comments indicated that regular classroom teachers, interpreters, teachers of the deaf, hearing classmates, and D/HH students contribute to active participation by the D/HH student. Focus groups identified specific barriers that interfered with participation of each of these groups of individuals, and they also identified specific strategies to facilitate participation. Qualitative analyses of field observation data yielded results consistent with the comments collected from the focus groups participants. The observations identified accommodations that regular classroom teachers, teachers of the deaf, and interpreters can make to promote integration of the D/HH student. A summary synthesis of the data presents 16 specific strategies for overcoming barriers to participation.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.