Including ASD

Autism Inclusion The increasing demands of teaching professionals has met an interesting crossroads as medical problems have fully invaded and dominated many classrooms across America. The mysterious and impactful affliction of Autism has ravaged recent generations of human offspring to a harmful effect. The wide ranging span of Autism and the many sub-disorders that this condition sets has seen educating these types of afflicted children with more and more difficulty as laws and mandates continually disrupt the process of both healing and educating these vulnerable children and their families.

The purpose of this essay is to explore the problems of autism and how the idea of inclusion of these children within these classrooms is problematic. This essay will argue that not enough is known about Autism to suggest that teachers are having any significant impact on these children or if the presence of these children in classrooms is having any positive impact on the other non-afflicted children. This essay will also suggest that a more conservative approach is necessary when including autistic children in typical classroom situations.

This essay will formulate reasonable ideas that suggest that the overall individual or subjective value of each classroom may make exceptions to this rule, but the necessity of federal standards on all public schools detracts from this idea and its ability to be successful. Background The importance of understanding how autism is affecting not only our schools but also at the societal level can be very helpful in determining how this affliction impacts a classroom or school district.

By correlating how this affliction's impacts are associated with classroom results a very interesting and complex set of circumstances arise where no one really knows what is best. Teachers, parents, principles and students are all going along with something that there is real understanding as to why it is done. The idea of "least restrictive environment" or LRE is an important term to dissect before delving into the main body of the argument.

This argument is premised upon the idea that the public school system is necessarily restrictive at its core essence. In other words, schools are not designed to be free flowing and chaotic. The ordering of schools and the organizing principles are placed in certain aspects to formulate guidance and learning. In understanding how LRE impacts this argument of inclusion its important to first understand the mysterious affliction that is autism and its many sub-disorders that are associated with this condition.

Defining Autism The Science Foundation suggests that in order to understand autism, one must first comprehend Autism Spectrum Disorders, which is the more formal term or diagnosis for the medical condition. They suggest that "when people refer to "Autism" today, they are usually talking about Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), which are five complex, brain-based disorders that affect a person's behavior as well as social and communication skills.

The Centers for Disease Control describes ASDs as: "developmental disabilities that cause substantial impairments in social interaction and communication and the presence of unusual behaviors and interests. Many people with ASDs also have unusual ways of learning, paying attention, and reacting to different sensations. The thinking and learning abilities of people with ASDs can vary -- from gifted to severely challenged.

An ASD begins before the age of 3 and lasts throughout a person's life." Misunderstanding Autism While many will boast of expertise of dealing with autistic children, very little is known about this condition as it continues to grow and expand into many communities. The mysterious nature of this condition suggests that public schools are not the most equipped to handle such inclusive efforts as bringing these disabled children into the classroom.

When such a phenomenon as autism is so vaguely understood, it may explain much frustration to a problem that may not have a solution that aligns itself with inclusion. There has been much speculation about how this condition has infected so many young children. For instance, the feedback that a parent receives from the child is often different that is interpreted from the doctor's.

"Throughout the history of autism in the United States, parental observations and priorities have come into periodic conflict with professional opinions, whether those opinions concerned the adequacy of parents' childrearing abilities or their belief that there is an epidemic of new cases of autism. Perhaps because of this conflict, parents have often been at the vanguard of critical changes in expert understanding of autism," (Silverman & Brosco, 2007).

Causes of Autism While it would seem that with much attention on this growing issue that a root cause would be clearly identified and aide in assisting in remedying the problems associated with this condition. The fast paced style of the current state of technology and information flow has caused a serious problem within modern research as too much data is flowing in too many different directions. The ability of the internet and online learning has created an abundance of research available that can significantly contribute to the argument.

In finding a true cause of this disorder it may even be more helpful to find ways to eliminate seemingly valid and reasonable causes for this condition. In gathering some research regarding the causes of autism there is wide debate. Szatmari (2003) proposed a reasonable model in dealing with this problem. He argued that "It is gratifying to see that research into the causes of autism has helped to temper the guilt so often experienced by parents when the disorder was considered to be psychogenic in origin.

However, the difficulty of conducting sound studies of causation has now led some healthcare practitioners to encourage parents to act on very poor quality data and vigorously pursue hypothetical causes.

It is generally anticipated, however, that with newer technologies and study designs, the risk factors initiating the causal chain that culminates in this profoundly disabling disorder will soon be identified." Mandates For Inclusion Even though the science behind autism and its wide span of disorders, a serious and direct effort has been made to include these children within the public school system. There are many reasons why this has been done.

Political, economic, social and philanthropic ideals are all represented in this movement to include these children in public schools, and it is necessary to examine some of the major mandates that have collectivized these ideals into a tangible law that has wide-spanning effects on all children under federal jurisdiction. In evaluating the efficiency, effectiveness or economic feasibility of any operation, it is necessary and prudent to look at the overbearing strategic force to notice an alignment of value and quality.

The Department of Education declared their mission as "ED's mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access." The National Education Association (NEA) declared their mission as: "Our mission is to advocate for education professionals and to unite our members and the nation to fulfill the promise of public education to prepare every student to succeed in a diverse and interdependent world." It is clear that the national leadership branch of public education is focused on preparation for competition and global interdependence.

Educators must ask why the need to include autistic children who seem to be reasonable placed outside this sphere of future influence. The lack of cure of autism at this current stage suggests that this disability can be severe in its ultimate impacts. More problems begin occur when viewing autism through a child who is particularly high functioning and able to participate in many aspects of classroom behavior and many indeed contribute to the end state of education as outlined by federal leadership.

The creation of federal inclusion is necessary to fully grasp the entirety of the argument as a clear evolution to this point in time, may have been well intended, but has caused a variety of problems that are rooted in several different research areas, professions and segments of society. History of Approach In the past decades, as the public school movement gained power and momentum in the 20th century, students that may have well been identified as autistic, or residing somewhere within the ASD spectrum.

The typical approach in past years was to simply pull these children out of the classroom and send them off to a special program, school or back home with the parent. The rise of two working parents must also be considered to be applicable in this situation where many times public schools serve as "dumping grounds" for unwanted children or children from families with abusive and neglectful values and practices as seen in so many places throughout the country.

Certain legislative acts towards the end of the last century and the beginning of this century has placed the idea of inclusion in a new and harsh light. In 1997, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was established by federal law passed by Congress. This initiative provides much guidance on autism and how it is to be treated in public schools.

Autism, as a " developmental disability significantly affecting verbal and nonverbal communication and social interaction, generally evident before age three, that adversely affects a child's educational performance." There exists the problem of federal mandates that exceed reasonable boundaries. No Child Left Behind furthers this schism between state., local and federal authorities on the best way to educate our nation's children. The ability for decisions to be made within the classroom require much approval and eventual management. Micromanagement has become a common way to approach and solve problems.

Money also plays a role in the traditional approach, where schools and school districts are rewarded for scoring high on certain standardized tests which rarely reveal anything besides rote memorization and basic skills. Options The solution to this problem is contained in the way researchers ask new and important questions. The questions being asked right now do not address the reality on the ground level. The increasingly cumbersome and difficult maze of problems that many if not most educational professionals are dealing with right now resemble a crisis.

This simply means a new and perhaps radical new option must be considered. Simplifying the issue becomes the most important task at hand when chaos rules. Autism and those children with autism need to be seriously considered as worthwhile recipients of public education funds, energy and resources. This option is quite dramatic and may seem offensive, rude and dismissive at face value.

Such an idea must be considered under new evidence and reason that reflects the dire need for substantial and effective change which aligns strategic aims laid out by federal leadership and carried out by education professionals across the country. This symbiotic flow needs to be unclogged at many levels as there are many distractions as the demands for special education and ASD specialized treatment creates an environment of healing more than of learning. Chamberlain et al.

(2006) suggested that there is no clear cut answer when dealing with the issue of including or excluding autism in regular classrooms. They wrote "The involvement of children with autism in the social structures of regular classrooms reveals a mixed picture.

On the one hand, the children with autism managed to avoid social isolation: some had only a few weak ties and no reciprocal friendships, while others were centrally involved and enjoyed considerable reciprocity." This idea points towards the continuous mysterious nature of both the affliction and the best ways to address the problems associated with the affliction. Social interaction plays a pivotal role in the development of every child and person as they grow and evolve in their social environment.

Public schools are at the core of many social circles throughout the country, and it is imperative that options that school leaders and school districts select, reflect the true representations of those within the community. Full, Partial or None Full inclusion, partial inclusion, or exclusion appear to be the three simple options available for further pedagogical approaches towards the subject. Full inclusion appears to have too many drawbacks and provides a problematic and complicating approach to a problem that needs addressing at other levels.

Full inclusion of ASD children would most likely work fine and thrive in certain situations where there is reasonable amounts of support and resources that could handle such extra demands. These schools could take these efforts on themselves through the assistance of the school district if there were not already mandates that legally require these channels of influence to react in a certain way in accordance with policies set out by federal politicians.

Partial inclusion is what is being experienced today by many schools across the country who are using their special education resources on ASD afflicted children. The overwhelming amount of children who are not medically classified with some sort of ASD type diagnosis has flooded the public schools and many are just trying to survive as this onslaught continuously distracts and puts the other, non-afflicted children at a disadvantage. Exclusion serves as the most conservative, and dramatic option at the same time.

One option to consider would to set higher standards of entrance for children to be admitted to public school. While the intentions may be good to attempt to educate these young afflicted children, it is essentially a wasted effort. The strategic guidance and ultimate purpose of public schooling is about being competitive in a global environment, and public schools need to.