Teacher Training
While there is no comprehensive, agreed-upon method for training teachers of mainstreamed classrooms or actually teaching in mainstreamed classrooms, there are some successful cases in existence. Many successful mainstream teachers have found that an important goal in teacher training "is to increase their knowledge about exceptional children" (Baker and Gottlieb, 1980, p.11) in order to encourage more positive attitudes toward mainstreaming.

In order to change past attitudes or beliefs, regular teachers must: 1) have knowledge about the student's academic and behavior patterns; 2) feel good about their own teaching abilities in order to take on an integrated classroom; 3) have support from the school's administration and other available services; 4) have a positive attitude to influence the other children in the classroom. A teacher who is positive about integration and who knows that he/she has material and support available will be able to accomplish change.

The mainstreaming of handicapped children into non-handicapped classrooms can be a threatening concept to a teacher who has never taught handicapped students. The main goal of all teachers is to be able to make a difference academically using their teaching skills. However, when teachers receive little training or experience in teaching handicapped children, their confidence in their teaching skills is diminished. Thus, the availability of resources and support for regular teachers is directly correlated to their attitudes of being able to provide an appropriate education in mainstreamed classrooms. Successful mainstreaming requires that teachers have the appropriate training, materials, and support in order to provide the least restrictive environment (LRE) possible.

Vital to the success of any student, but especially a physically handicapped or learning disabled student, is the understanding that each individual learns in a different way. There are a variety of teaching/learning methods, including lecture, discussion, group work, peer teaching, individual learning, computer-assisted learning, and programmed learning. While each student learns best from a combination of these methods, non-physically handicapped and non-learning disabled students can often still learn successfully in the classroom even when the teacher does not use the teaching method most suited for them. However, physically handicapped and learning disabled students cannot always successfully adapt to teaching methods different than the one that best suits them. Therefore, it is important that a teacher varies his/her teaching method so that all students have an equal opportunity to learn.

Once determined that a physically handicapped individual has the capabilities to be mainstreamed into the least restrictive learning environment, then the school and teacher must take certain steps to facilitate social and emotional development of the individual. Along with special instruction, the physically handicapped student should be provided because most "deficiencies that interfere with the child's learning potential can often be compensated for with adaptive equipment and/or methods" (Greer, 1980, p.146).

There are certain responsibilities that successful teachers have assumed in order to ensure effective results in their integrated classrooms; these are: 1) develop orientation strategies for mainstream entry; 2) assess needs and set goals; 3) plan teaching strategies and use of resources; 4) implement teaching strategies and use resources; 5) facilitate learning; 6) evaluate learning (Redden & Blackhurst, 1978).

Teacher Competency Training (TCT)

Teacher Competency Testing is a means for measuring the competency of teachers to teach physically handicapped and learning disabled students. While the test supposedly measures material similar to the required legislative regulations, problems arise in determining exactly what needs to be tested. The tests have generated mixed feelings - while some believe that it is a fair means of testing teachers, others believe that it is an insult to test teachers and creates a negative stigma for them. TCT has been implemented in 48 out of 50 states as of 1991. Each state tests differently:

States that use specialty area tests on teachers do so in different ways also:

The basic objectives of the tests include:

The most important part of the TCT is that teachers understand the physical, emotional, developmental, behavioral, and educational traits of physically handicapped and learning disabled children. These characteristics are needed so that teachers can identify the strengths and weaknesses of each individual student (1991 Council for Exceptional Children).

Diagnostic Prescriptive Teaching (DPT) in the Mainstream:

According to one perspective, the best approach for teachers to take in the mainstreamed classroom environment is the diagnostic prescriptive method for evaluating physically handicapped and learning disabled students. Diagnosis is important for the teacher's basic knowledge about the student's performance ability, strengths, weaknesses and learning styles (Laycock, 1980, p.287). Key to this teaching method is the 1) diagnosis of the student's needs, thereby allowing the system to become more specialized, and 2) the implementation of the specialized program and the evaluation of the student's performance. This evaluation allows the plan to be fine tuned to meet the student's progress. After these two initial steps, a cyclic pattern is created in which the program is continually developed, implemented, and evaluated (Laycock, 1980, p.286). The diagnostic prescriptive method is very similar to the student's IEP, however, it allows a systematic short term approach for the teacher before the specific lesson-planning and target goals can be determined.

After the specific course objectives and target goals are set for the students, certain teaching strategies need to be implemented in order to diminish any obstacles introduced in mainstreaming. The teacher must recognize the obstacles within his/her own teaching environment that can either decrease/increase performance levels. Some of these environmental obstacles are: time schedule, task grouping, the type of instruction learning, and the physical classroom environment (Laycock, 1980, p.293). It is important that the teacher use his/her time efficiently when dealing with handicapped students. The teacher must recognize which types of activities or course work require more energy from the student, and therefore, plan accordingly. Once a teacher understands a student's attention span and ability to work on certain tasks, then he/she can structure the time of the lessons, roles that the students will play in the lessons, and time in which the lesson should be scheduled in the day. A teacher might have a longer lesson plan that he/she will start the day with instead of doing it at the end of the day when the student might be more tired. Additionally, if the lesson plan is long, the teacher might give the student a less active role in the lesson so that the student does not lose attention and does not divert attention from the other students.

In grouping students together during certain instructional activities, the teacher must be able to assess what types of group learning the handicapped students prefer - small groups or large groups. While the teacher in integrated classrooms can seldomly afford to give individualized instruction, finding the type of group learning that the handicapped student is most comfortable with, can be equally beneficial. Peer-tutoring allows one-on-one instruction in addition to a teacher's instruction. This type of learning may be necessary for the student to master certain skills or lessons that the teacher requires in the mainstream classroom.

In addition to creating effective instruction programs, the physical setting of the classroom is just as important to the handicapped students' learning. It is important for the teacher to recognize and remove all obstacles that might inhibit the student's ability and desire to integrate him/herself effectively in the classroom. For example, physically handicapped students might need wider spaces between desks in order to move in and out; visually or hearing impaired students would need support services designed specifically for their impairments. All of these adjustments are essential in making the student feel comfortable within his/her learning environment, rather than disadvantaged. The placement of the student's desk is also important; a teacher does not want a handicapped student in the back row where he/she can get lost. While all these details seem obvious and minor to the effectiveness of classroom mainstreaming, every detail is important in eliminating problems with mainstreaming.

Successful IEP and IIP Designs for Handicapped Students:

The individualized education plan (IEP) is most successful when the teacher and student both work together to create an IEP which gives them both responsibility for the learning process. Additionally, "participation in writing the IEP may help relieve teacher anxiety concerning accountability if the student does not reach specified annual goals" (Odle, 1980, p.247-248). A well-designed IEP ensures the decrease in misunderstanding of expectations and goals by the teacher and student. It acts as a "academic management system, providing the basis for daily lesson plans and an ongoing evaluation program" (Odle, 1980, p.254).

The IEP creates an initial general outline of short term instructional goals and services for the student, and then develops into a more specific plan as the student learning progresses. The Individualized Implementation Plan (IIP) is a more specific service plan that combines the teacher's and school's efforts to create specialized programs and resources for the student. Both the IEP and IIP should be continually evaluated and updated as the student progresses.

In recent years, districts that were unable to provide an appropriate education for handicapped students have had to pay for those children to attend special private institutions. In 1993, the case of Florence County School District vs. Carter, the Supreme Court ruled that it was the school districtÕs responsibility to reimburse the handicapped student for his expense in having to attend a private special education school. This decision did not lead to the creation of a voucher system for handicapped students, rather merely established the right to sue for reimbursement (Ebenstein, 1996, p.62).

The school district is responsible for providing appropriate education in the least restrictive environment for all physically handicapped or learning disabled students. If, for any reason, the school district is unable to meet the needs of a student, then the school district is responsible for placing that student in another school district or private school in order to meet the least restrictive environment requirement. Even in the case that a parent chooses to send his/her child to a private school, under IDEA, the "school district still has some obligation to these unilaterally placed children" (Ebenstein, 1996, p.63). In this case, a parent can still obtain additional special education services from the school district, such as therapists, for his/her child in private school; under the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), the district in which the handicap child resides cannot deny him/her additional special education services.

Click here for further information on teacher training.

Government 375: Educational Reform and Ideology