The Education of Australian School Students With the Most Severe Intellectual Disabilities: Where Have We Been and Where Could We Go? A Discussion Primer

Abstract

The education of Australian students with the most severe intellectual disabilities continues to present substantial challenges to policymakers, practitioners and families. These are complex and involve philosophy and ethics generally, and curriculum assessment and pedagogy specifically. In light of the various phases of development for an Australian Curriculum, the authors advocate for broad-based debate about the nature of education for these students. To prime discussion, this paper looks at the past, present and possible futures with respect to the education of Australian students with the most severe intellectual disabilities.

An exploration of parental decisions to transfer children from regular to special schools

“…They have largely been invisible members of the community and have typically received care rather than education (Lyons & Cassebohm, 2012). It is no longer usual for children to be institutionalised because of intellectual disability; instead, families stay together (Burrell & Trip, 2011), and children's lives tend to follow similar patterns to those of their brothers and sisters who don't have a disability.…”

“…While inclusive education is based on the premise of educating children of all abilities (Danforth & Jones, 2015), and there is evidence that access to regular schooling is beneficial for even the most profoundly intellectually disabled students (e.g., Lyons & Cassebohm, 2012), the difficulties associated with including students with intellectual disability in typical learning activities may be a key to the trend towards segregation. Indeed history suggests that specialist schooling was established in order to specifically target the learning needs of this group of students (Anastasiou & Kauffman, 2011).…”

“…Although it is difficult to use standardised assessment with this group of students (Lyons & Cassebohm, 2012), there has been considerable discussion about the systemic lack of accountability for the learning of students with intellectual disability (see, for example, Anderson & Boyle, 2015;Children and Young People with Disability Australia, 2016;Forlin et al, 2013). This problem has been discussed at length by Wakeman, Flowers and Browder (2014), and has been raised as a potential breach of Australia's Disability Discrimination Act (Cumming & Dickson, 2013).…”

“…- Lyons & Cassebohm (2012) noted the limited training in the pedagogy of the developmental model received by teachers of students with intellectual disability. -Pfahl & Powell (2011) reported the high number (80%) of students with disability that leave school with no credential to qualify for post school education.…”

“…First, the findings indicate that parents are more likely to remain in regular schools if teachers are provided with professional development regarding teaching and learning for children with intellectual disability. If students are to be authentic learners in regular schools, their teachers need to be skilled and knowledgeable in evidence-based practice (see, for example, Courtade et al, 2012;Kleinert et al, 2015;Lyons & Cassebohm, 2012). Second, the financial commitment made to including students with intellectual disability in regular schools sends a message to parents about the status of their children and what is valued in schools.…”