Effective Teaching Strategy for Special Children

¶ … activity of learning is central in the life of humans, and forms the core of education, in spite of most learning taking place outside school (Shuell, 2013). Psychologists and philosophers have been striving for ages to comprehend how learning takes place, its nature, and how people can influence each other's learning by means of teaching and other similar activities (Shuell, 2013). Learning Theories and Special Education There are numerous propounded theories regarding how individuals learn, employed at schools by teachers for enriching their pupils' learning experience (LTSE, 2011).

Teachers can apply an appropriate theory and help their pupils retain necessary information. This is applicable to how special education (SPED) can work with learning theories (LTSE, 2011). SPED teachers should make the most of these theories in their classrooms; the best theories to aid special education are: Cognitive Load Theory, Gestalt, Component Display Theory, Sign Learning Theory, Connection Theory, L. Atincronbsch and R. Snow, and Gagne's Conditions of Learning (LTSE, 2011).

SPED teachers can adopt Gestalt theory, which integrates grouping; however, they must bear in mind that some connections might be required for their pupils in application as well as verbally, as SPED students might be unable to form connections without support (LTSE, 2011). The Sign Learning and Cognitive Load theories encompass simplification of learning for fully aiding children with learning. Connection theory, based on cause-effect correlation of stimulus and response, is also effective in SPED children's learning.

Gagne's learning theory and the component Display Theory both include various practical and verbal features that aid learning, and have similar structures beneficial in the process of learning (LTSE, 2011). Special educators can consider all of the above theories for their classrooms, and select one or more approaches that will best suit their pupils; this may appear to be in contradiction with regular classroom principles. Children with special needs learn differently, and traditional teachers might not be alert to the needs of this minority student group while teaching (LTSE, 2011).

The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) urges teachers to uncover their own conviction in the above theories, as it provides a setting for self-awareness (LTSE, 2011). A setting that enables teachers to reflect upon their job, practices and techniques to reach SPED pupils will facilitate improvement of the complete academic environment (LTSE, 2011). Furthermore, teachers can identify what works most effectively for them, and continue to expand their personal knowledge base.

An approach based on multiple theories -- Component Display theory, Cognitive Flexibility Theory, Anchored Instruction, Social Learning Theory and Adult Learning -- may be best (LTSE, 2011). Principal Leadership and Special Education According to DiPaola & Walther-Thomas (2003), a good leader is devoted to every child's success and works in collaboration with others for accomplishing this goal. In such schools, diversity in the classroom is the rule -- good leaders do not segregate classrooms and cluster all special needs students into one class (DiPaola, Walther-Thomas, 2003).

A competent principal will devote necessary time to developing rules and practices to support classrooms (such as relevant information, specific material and human resources, decision-making authority, role flexibility, and opportunities for shared leadership); this helps school teams in effectively performing their jobs (Embich, 2001; Gersten et al., 2001). For instance, a good principal will promote classroom interaction and collaboration in a cost-effective manner, by taking care that academic specialists and teachers engage in joint planning for addressing classroom issues and instructional requirements (Walther-Thomas et al., 2000).

Leadership Challenges Apart from expectations for efficient instructional leadership, a principal now has numerous responsibilities that are non-instructional (e.g., greater expectations with regards to communicating child activities and progress with parents/caregivers, increased professional accountability, etc.) (Drake & Roe, 1999). A majority of the conventional duties of a principal, like discipline maintenance, ensuring a secure learning environment, and budget management, are now rather onerous and complex (Murphy, 1994; Whitaker, 1998).

Also, while there has been decentralization of a substantial amount of decision-making to local schools, there are not many clear guidelines that outline which duties belong to district-level authorities, and which come under the principal's jurisdiction (Drake & Roe, 1999; Williams & Portin, 1997).

Because of the complicated nature of school leaders' jobs, growing expectations for teachers' and students' performance, greater scrutiny by the public, and increased accountability, it is unsurprising that a smaller number of teachers opt for career paths which lead them to administrative posts (Barker, 1996; DiPaola & Tschannen-Moran, 2003; ERS, 2000; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics [USBLS], 2000-2001, 1996-1997). A scarcity of experienced staff interested to assume the mantle of administrative leadership is the reason why uncertified people can be seen leading the schools and learning (DiPaola, Walther-Thomas, 2003).

Impact on Special Education DiPaola & Walther-Thomas assert that dearth of experienced principals clearly affects schools' leadership quality. People having no or minimal experience in the field, find it hard to recognize and acknowledge different learners' different needs. Even principals having prior experience with schools, but inadequate formal preparation to step into a principal's shoes, often cannot adequately grasp how to plan, organize, and provide services for meeting special students' needs.

It is the view of the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC, 2001) that a principal plays a critical role in improving at-risk and SPED learners' educational opportunities (DiPaola, Walther-Thomas, 2003). Principles have to lead and guide their school in developing a "culture of inclusiveness" for special needs students to be appropriately served (Burrello & Lashley, 1992; NASBE, 1992; NCD, 1995; NRC, 1997; NSDC, 2001). Often, lacking administrative support causes SPED teachers to resign from their posts (DiPaola, Walther-Thomas, 2003).

It is apparent that a lack of adequately-prepared, skilled principals can potentially intensify the present shortage of SPED leaders in the nation. Every new principal finds the role's complexity highly challenging, and an ill-prepared individual will not have a chance to do more than just deal with day-to-day issues (DiPaola, Walther-Thomas, 2003). References Barker, S. (1996). Is your successor in the schoolhouse? Finding principal candidates. NASSP Bulletin, 81, 85-91 Burrello, L. C., & Lashley, C. (1992).On organizing the future: The destiny of special education. In K. Waldron, A. Riester, & J.

Moore (Eds.), Special education: The challenge for the future, (pp. 64-95). San Francisco: Edwin Mellen Press. DiPaola, M. F., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2003, March). The principalship at a crossroads: A study of the condition and concerns of principals. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin (87), 43-67 DiPaola M. F. & Walther-Thomas C., (2003). Principals and Special Education: The Critical Role of School Leaders. Prepared for the Center on Personnel Studies in Special Education and the National Clearinghouse for Professions in Special Education Drake, T. L., & Roe, W. H. (1999).The principalship.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Embich, J. L. (2001). The relationship of secondary special education teachers' roles and factors that lead to professional burnout. Teacher Education.