Every society in the world battles out for the proper solution to combat discrimination in any possible forms. Actually, this is not only experienced among the inter-racial or inter-social political and geographical perspectives for even the very basic social structure of any society has its own dilemmas. Although it is undesirable to have such discriminatory acts, the concept behind the rule full-inclusion somehow spans greater undesirability. The very idea of full-inclusion presents that disabled and mentally challenged students should be included in school classes that are built for “normal” people (Crawford).
Certain groups defend the notion that disabled children will have better chances of surviving the harsh society if they were to face real life challenges and thinking instead of simulated or controlled special classes (Pfeiffer, 1999). On a personal note, it is really undesirable to have policies such as the full-inclusion project. Actually, it is even a Federal Law violation to implement full-inclusion among schools (Johns). First of all, nobody wants to be discriminated.
However, there are certain things that should be done in order to better attain order and efficiency among the citizens in order for them to function and contribute more to the society. One drawback of full-inclusion is the fact that handicap students may interfere with the normal processes of learning for students who are physically and mentally normal. Children with disabilities are high maintenance and therefore will need special arrangements and treatments from social class workers like teachers and administrators. Thus, this will become a hindrance for the effective functioning of school instructors inside the classroom.
Moreover, there are still no real evidence, probably because of still few researches, which suggests that disabled students develop greater improvements when exposed to normal students. Apparently, most of the advocates who are rallying full-inclusion do not have real life experiences in handling disabled students. They are not the teachers or social workers who see and feel the real needs of disabled students who practically need special attention and care outside of the worlds of “normal” individuals. Thus this will only compromise the welfare of the disabled students more.
Summarizing, the idea of full-inclusion is truly undesirable. References Crawford, Donald Full Inclusion: One Reason for Opposition. ExecPC, Retrieved February 25 2009, from http://my. execpc. com/~presswis/inclus. html Johns, Bev Does “Full Inclusion” Violate Federal Law?. Retrieved February 25, 2009, from Vor. net Web site: http://www. vor. net/Full%20Inclusion%20Article. htm Pfeiffer, Steven (1999). Inclusion Practices with Special Needs Students. Retrieved February 25 2009, from http://books. google. com. ph/books? id=kxA7nF68STAC&printsec=frontcover#PPP11,M1Sample Essay of RushEssay.com