Not in My School Yard by Shepherd (2009). Article Review - Essay Example

?Running Head: Article Review: Not Article Review: Not in My School Yard Article Review: Not in My School Yard Introduction In this paper, the article Not in My School Yard by Shepherd (2009) of Guardian newspaper will be reviewed. The article focuses on the plight of the parents of children suffering from Down’s syndrome who seek admission in mainstream schools. Several external resources have been consulted in writing this paper so that a holistic view of the topic the article under discussion deals with can be presented. The Main Issues Julia Shepherd’s report throws light on some neglected educational problems in our society. The primary focus of the report is on the parents of children with Down’s syndrome. Down’s syndrome is a genetic disease which causes mental retardation and other psychological co-morbidities. In childhood, a patient of Down’s syndrome has problems in learning because they have serious cognitive and behavioural difficulties, which hampers normal growth of mental capabilities and by the time puberty sets in, the mental condition of the patient is considerably different from that of his/her peers in the same age group (Alton, 1998). Conventionally, it is thought that these children need special education which can address their specific needs (Alkin, Freeman, and Kasari, 1999). Nevertheless in her report, Shepherd (2009) reports that most of the parents of children with Down’s syndrome wish to send their children to the local mainstream schools so that they can read and write with normal children in a normal classroom environment. The parents want that their children are acquainted with the community and the local people; and a mainstream school is the best place to achieve this. Nevertheless, most of the schools are reluctant to accept the children with Down’s syndrome. Particularly in the senior schools, children with Down’s syndrome are becoming increasingly unwelcome and their parents are being compelled to shift their children to some special school. The gravest aspect of this problem is that the local authorities are not cooperating with the parents in their confrontation with the local schools. Instead, in a situation of persuasion on the part of the helpless parents, a local authority may even go to the extent of cutting down the special educational facilities and assistive therapies provided by the Government to redress the learning problems of a child with Down’s syndrome (Shepherd, 2009). The Voices The report under discussion has been written in third person and the reporter has avoided making personal remarks. The report can be identified as an example of investigative journalism where Shepherd (2009) has conducted an interview based survey to dig out the reality of UK school education system. In this way, the report becomes the voice of the parents of children with Down’s syndrome. The intended audience are general public and government officials, who must contemplate on the problems faced by the unfortunate parents seriously, and then attempt to provide humanistic solutions. Information Available in the Article The article is highly informative since it provides direct feedback and interview discussions with responsible NGO officials and parents of the children with Down’s syndrome. Shepherd (2009) mentions that a study for the Down Syndrome Educational Trust conducted back in 2002 show that if a child with Down’s syndrome receives education in a mainstream school instead of a special school, he/she can build up about 5 to 6 six years faster spoken language capability and literacy. Furthermore, Bob Black (who is the information director at Down Syndrome Education International) admits to Shepherd (2009) during an interview that under pressure from the mainstream school authorities, parents of the children with Down’s syndrome are being compelled to transfer their children to some special school and the battle is being gradually lost. Moreover, when the parents are unwilling to admit their children to a special school for mentally handicapped, they are being refused to be given statements of special educational needs by the local authorities. Information Wanting Although Shepherd’s (2009) work deserves appreciation due to an almost exhaustive treatment of the topic, some important information appears to be missing. For example, there is no sufficient information on how do the normal students react when a student with Down’s syndrome is introduced in their classroom. According to several educational resources (e.g. Davis, 2008) students with special educational needs may be isolated by his or her classmates in a normal classroom environment. According to Buckley et al (2006), limited academic expectancies are a prime problem of special schools. Shepherd (2009) has not done any significant analysis on this matter. Moreover, researchers like Winebrenner (2006) and Alton (1998) have done considerable work on the exact issues the teachers face in handling a student suffering from Down’s syndrome inside a normal classroom environment. Therefore, it could be highly contextual study had Shepherd (2009) provided a tentative list of such issues along with the mention of empirical evidence. Without this information, how can the reader assess the stand of the mainstream schools which generally do not appoint teachers trained in special education? Relevant Policy and Legislations In Shepherd’s (2009) article, we find that an inquiry had been set up by the Government in order to investigate the situation of children with special educational needs. Children suffering from Down’s syndrome fall under this category. The inquiry (named Lamb Inquiry) was to be conducted by Brian Lamb (Chair of the Special Educational Consortium and Executive Director of Policy and Advocacy at RNID). The article under discussion was published in Guardian news paper on 19th May, 2009. On the other hand, Lamb was going to submit his report a few months later. Finally, the report of Lamb Inquiry was published in July 2009. In the report, Lamb (2009) has put forward a large number of recommendations that not only help to construct a government endorsed policy framework but also assist in redefining the term Special Educational Need (SEN) in different contexts through varied situations. The main focus of Lamb Inquiry lies on establishing dedicated legal tribunals to resolve disputes in the case there is discrimination towards a child with SEN. Moreover, Part 4 of Education Act (1996) clearly explains the term SEN which helps us to assess the responsibility of the educational institutions. Special Educational Needs and Disability Act (2001) can also be regarded as instrumental in widening the scope of parity and justice towards children with SEN. Personal Response and Conclusion Shepherd’s (2009) work, although published as a news paper article, is very important and informative. Clearly, the author is sympathetic towards the children with Down’s syndrome who are being denied admission in mainstream schools, particularly in the senior sections. True, that at the time of puberty, a student with Down’s syndrome can not find a girlfriend or boyfriend as the case may be. He or she cannot take part in the various societal activities like others, so the student is likely to be outcaste in the classroom environment. Yet, Shepherd (2009) has emphasised on the good effects that mainstream education has on these pupils with SEN. She has used survey results and research findings from reputable sources and provided sensible arguments with the help of the information she collected through personal interviews. However, her investigation does not cover other side of the story. She has not interviewed even a single teacher from a mainstream school who has handled one or more cases of handling a student with Down’s syndrome inside a normal classroom environment. Is it wise enough to send mainstream teachers to special education training programmes just for one or two pupils with SEN in the class? Why not special education schools are improved instead of creating pressure on the mainstream schools? These major questions appear to remain unresolved. List of References Alkin, M., Freeman, S., and Kasari C. 1999, Satisfaction and desire for change in educational placement for children with down syndrome perceptions of parents, Remedial & Special Education, 20 (3) Alton, S. 1998, Differentiation not discrimination: delivering the curriculum for children with Down’s syndrome in mainstream schools, Support for Learning 13, pp. 167-173 Buckley, S., Bird, G., Sacks, B., & Archer, T. 2006, A comparison of mainstream and special education for teenagers with Down syndrome: implications for parents and teachers, Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 9, pp. 54-67 Davis, A. 2008, Children with Down syndrome: implications for assessment and intervention in the school, School Psychology Quarterly, 23, pp. 271-281 Shepherd, J. 2009, Not in my school yard, The Guardian. Education Pages, p. 7. Available: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/may/19/downs-syndrome-school. Last accessed on 3rd May 2013 Education Act 1996, (Part 4), London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office Lamb, B. 2009, Lamb Inquiry: Special Educational Needs and Parental Confidence, Nottingham: DCSF Publications Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001, London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office Winebrenner, S. (2006), Teaching Kids with Learning Difficulties in the Regular Classroom: Ways to Challenge & Motivate Struggling Students to Achieve Proficiency with Required Standards, Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing Inc. Read More