Autistic children in the general education classroom, mainstreaming, inclusion and pull out options - Essay Example

Autistic children in the general education room, mainstreaming, inclusion and pull out options Introduction Autism is associated withthe impairment of brain development leading to a lack of social intercourse and communication. Such children, usually before 3 years of age, also display repetitive behavior. Since it involves a range of symptoms, a more convenient term to use is the autism spectrum disorders (ASD). For instance some milder signs might indicate a low level of impairment. Webster’s New World Medical Dictionary defines autism as “a spectrum of neuropsychiatric disorders characterized by deficits in social interaction and communication, and unusual and repetitive behavior. Some, but not all, people with autism are non-verbal” (www.medterms.com) The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, (DSM-IV) defines a wider spectrum of Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD) and refers to common characteristics – communication and social intercourse shortcomings - displayed by autistic children. Analysis While there is an abundance of available literature on the subject of autism, there is very little research carried out into the significance of environmental implications on the one hand and general classroom education, mainstreaming, inclusion and pull-out options on the other. The organization, its structure and its culture constitute the organizational environment and thus general classroom education invariably brings up the concept of environmental adjustment/readjustment to meet the contingency-specific demand associated with the presence of autistic children. The primacy and immediacy of this demand produce such issues as mainstreaming and inclusion in the inter-curricular activities of the school. This researcher has observed a set of inevitable outcomes in the research sample population of autistic children under study at the researcher’s organization. Schon’s (1983) own reflective thought process attributed to the professional’s would-be conduct and the subsequent investigation into the autistic child’s singular universe concept adequately delineates an otherwise extremely difficult hypothesis. According to Schon there is a process of reflective thought streaming to be undertaken by the professional leader with some characteristically defined attributes as his toolkit. This has been made stark clearer by Schon’s references to the organizational environment and the professional’s brainstorming practice sessions. The average psychotherapist is an action-oriented catalyst to cause positive ripple effects in this “single universe” of the autistic child. Organizational culture and strategic choices have to be integrated into this functional professional environment in order to produce the expected teaching/learning outcomes. Connotations and denotations of the ethical paradigm of the professional psychotherapist have not been so well collated than in this incisive analysis into the uncharted territory of reflective action. The autistic child irrespective of the range of definitional variances belongs to a special category of people with attention-deficits. Thus reflection in action helps the professional practitioner to overcome the negative impact of orthodox approaches in the general educational environment (Nadesan, 2005, p.188).As borne out by this researcher’s results from the focus group of the research sample, reflection-in-action necessitates what Schon calls “the manager’s concern for interpreting the external environment’s response to organizational action, i.e. the diagnosis of signs of trouble within the organization” (Schon, 1983, p.243). Within the organizational environment the complexity associated with the use of available techniques of diagnosis and treatment (not necessarily physical intervention) is heightened by the array of theories and techniques. Mainstreaming is a form of inclusion in that autistic children who have no special need for exclusion from the general classroom environment will be taught with those of the rest. This approach has a series of benefits for the decision making efforts of the management along with culture-specific organizational outcomes that indisputably focus on the empirical analytical aspects of the subject matter (Moyes, 2002, p.77). Inclusion or integration of autistic children into the general classroom environment has far reaching consequences for the management and the strictly circumscribed availability of strategic choices would compel the management to adopt ad-hoc decisions. Empirical evidence and research outcomes on autism have led to the DSM-IV definition of PDD on a broader perspective – Autistic Disorder, Asperger’s Disorder, Pervasive Developmental Disorder (Not Otherwise Specified), Rett’s Disorder and Childhood Disintegrative Disorder. This wider range in itself shows how various forms of autistic behavior and symptoms can be classified and defined with a view to integrating all of them into the mainstream classroom (Siegel, 1998, p.228). Thus special education is not a prerequisite in the general classroom environment unless specifically required. Professional and paraprofessionals play a very significant role in this context by employing a plethora of personal effects that come handy to them in extremely pressurized situations. Some authors have extensively focused on the use and abuse of organizational culture and structure to achieve predefined goals on resource allocation and utilization. While the general classroom might be sparsely populated by autistic children proper, a positive correlation or a regression cannot be established with flimsier data gathered through a haphazard process of researching on the instincts of the researcher. This phenomenon has been illustrated by many writers on autism especially with reference to the classroom structure and the autistic child’s place therein. What organizational culture puts forth as inherent classroom management practices would have a bearing on the outcomes of overall programs. The autistic child not only occupies the center point but also is the center of attention that invariably leads to abuse of resources and efforts. Some writers stress the need to focus on antecedents of autistic behaviors rather than the consequences. Their argumentative line essentially presumes the existence of a positive correlation between autistic behavior and the magnitude of non-intervention. The latter is occasioned by the generalized approach to autism in which mainstreaming and inclusion are ruled out as divergent contingency planning in controlling autism. There is also the need for an analysis of the causal factors that enhance teaching/learning outcomes in the general education classroom management context (Hesmondhalgh and Breakey, 2001, p.40). There has been a degree of negligence in this sphere in autism related organizational intervention. Failure to define appropriateness and timeliness of organizational intervention as Schon advocates under reflection-in-action approach could have been a major reason behind the mismatch between efforts at the internal organizational level and external environmental intervention which often fails to acknowledge pull-out options. Hypothesis: The primacy and immediacy of the organization’s environmental and cultural specificity have been partially ignored by autism program designers and planners thus leading to an abandonment of an a priori reflection-in-action approach on a broader level. As a corollary to this researcher’s Personalized Advanced Scholarly Study (PASS) which embodies the basic tenets of the psychological approach and intervention enunciated herein, the hypothesis fundamentally hinges on the personal belief that despite a host of negative attitudes that persistently encumber organizational approaches to autism, there is an enormous potential to design and create highly practical programs on mainstreaming and inclusion for silent but diligent intervention on the part of the aspiring professional (Powers, Editor, 2000, p.200). Available literature on the subject places less emphasis on exogenous variables perhaps due to the fact that it has been conclusively proved that autism is a genetic disorder. Despite this proof there is also a parallel attempt being made by teaching communities at large that behavioral tendencies of the autistic child could be altered with dynamic combinations of internal and external factors. Conclusion Autism as a disorder affecting a few individuals, has been subject some of the worst misinterpretations in communities today. Yet a growing body of current research has shed new light on the many-faceted nature of this disorder as one of which the severity can at least be reduced with well designed programs that advocate a general educational environment based treatment option of inclusion instead of exclusion (Hannah, 2001, p.92). Schon’s indefatigable efforts have successfully proved to the world that professional attitudes have to be realigned with reflection-in-action so that a highly desirable qualitative change could be brought about to the very programs that have been hitherto administered with little or no attention being paid to the teaching/learning outcomes. This causative principle of attention re-focus has helped communities to undertake a complete reassessment of techniques and approaches based on compartmentalized thoughtless and antiquated perceptions and conceptualizations. Schon has revolutionized the treatment process by focusing on the need to be reflective-in-action. REFERENCES 1. Hannah, L. (2001). Teaching Young Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorders to Learn. London: Autism Asperger Publishing Company 2. Hesmondhalgh, M. and Breakey, C. (2001). Access and Inclusion for Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorders: Let Me In. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 3. Moyes, R.A. (2002). Addressing the Challenging Behavior of Children with High- Functioning Autism/Asperger Syndrome in the Classroom: A Guide for Teachers and Parents. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 4. Nadesan, M. (2005). Constructing Autism. Oxford: Routledge. 5. Powers, M.D. (Ed.). (2000). Children with Autism: A Parents Guide. Maryland: Woodbine House. 6. Schon, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Book 7. Siegel, B. (1998). The World of the Autistic child: Understanding and treating autistic Spectrum Disorders. New York: Oxford University Press. 8. Websters New World Medical Dictionary, from. www.medferms.com Read More