WOW. that's a REALLY good quote..had me thinkin
We can't deny the fact that we are all different. it's just what ppl do about that..i guess.
THANKS YOU GUYS!! for EVERYONE that commented and replyed to this..today i need to make a FINAL paper over all about this topic. THANKS again

<Added>

(heehee) i need to go back and read some of your LONG replys..
but thanks again:D...

As far as racism is concerned, I think that things have improved outwardly in a public sense but, I feel that privately, most people have not changed. The laws of this land have been shaped by motivated and passionate people on all sides of the argument. Somehow in all this, reason initially seems to win out. This is only because the political climate has been conducive to change toward equality and justice since after WWII. People were sensitized to atrocities and injustice. Before WWII, whoever held the power dictated policy thereby quashing reason whenever it came into conflict with the power brokers (I.e. Union busting, slavery, laize fare capitalism etc..) People were not only sensitized after WWII but, the lower classes gained economic and political clout. This helped spawn the equal rights movement along with people being fed up with their living conditions.

As far as the inward private side goes, I don't think people have changed much at all with the exceptions of access to better education and, economic means. People tend to harbor hatreds and prejudices in their own private minds. Humans are innately wary of other people if they are different from themselves. The wise person transcends this to come to the realization that we are pretty much all the same. We might look different but, we all have worries, fears, money problems, likes, dislikes, talents, responsibilities and other people we care about.

The problem is that the public and the private have not yet converged. The laws and ideals moving civilization toward equality and justice are good but, not perfect. They need to evolve with changing times and, they need to be tempered by "common sense". With problems like reverse discrimination and, illegal immigration we can see this clearly. Power brokers in this country tend to placate these laws to our fears and suspicions and make them divisive dividers of our civilization to their advantage (Yes, I am opinionated).

Maybe we will all grow up a little more when we stop hating each other and focus our energies on changing out "the man".

lera:"kippsix you are some what Correct,
Being D/HH Student you are being forced to Take D/HH class evry year and to be in evry calss with Includion.
But thank God now you'r perents can sing some papers and you could get out of SpEd. "

Lera, parents have ALWAYS had the right to not accept SpEd services for their child. They also have the right to discontinue services. However, if the school/district thinks the child needs the service, they can go to mediation.

Deaf/Hard of Hearing services can be somewhat different. With amplification the student may or may not even need further interventions or accomodations. If sign interpreters are needed, then that will be provided.

Racism is only one aspect of discrimination. We all discriminate.

Kippix, I am well aware of special education law. I'm not saying and never said that SpEd services should be designated by race. I agree that language/race/cultural/socioeconomic status factors should play no part in qualifying students for special education services. But this hasn't always been the case, it hasn't been all that long since Diana v. State Board of Education (1970)in which Mexican-American students were assigned to special education classes based on their performance on an IQ test that was given in English and normed on native-born population. The test was deemed biased. In the history of the United States 1970 is not all that long ago.

From what I was told by professors who have PhDs in special education, inclusion has not been around for decades.
Recent Trends in Delivery of Special Education Services:
1. Segregation (before 1975)
2. Mainstreaming (1980s)
3. Integration (mid-1980s)
4. Inclusion (1990s to present)

I'm glad to hear that your district is heavily into inclusion, so long as that is the LRE for the students and the placement meets the Holland standards. But I know that in my geographical area there are still a lot self-contained classrooms. The state I live in is still heavily into labeling students and using a discrepancy model for qualifying students. I personally think that a response to intervention approach is superior because it does away with the labels and it gives you plenty of information about interventions that worked for the student.

"As far as there being a monetary incentive to identify students as Special Ed, I have to tell you that Special Ed is a HUGE drain on a budget. It costs WAY more than it brings in. Every district/school would be ecstatic if they didn't have to provide SpEd services!! It is an expensive program, and comes with a huge amount of state and federal monitoring resulting in fines if you aren't following the law."

I know that SpEd is a huge drain on a school's budget especially during the referral process, so schools probably don't want students to qualify or be referred for special education services.

I suggest you read "What's so special about special education?" by Douglas and Lynn Fuchs (you can probably find it on ProQuest, they'll tell you why schools need special education.

Schools may not be intentionally promoting racism, but there is still a large discrepancy in high school graduation rates among students of different racial groups in the US.

National Graduation Rates By Race and Gender (from http://www.urban.org/publications/410936.html)



By Race/Ethnicity Nation Female Male

American Indian/AK Nat 51.1 51.4† 47.0†
Asian/Pacific Islander 76.8 80.0† 72.6†
Hispanic 53.2 58.5 48
Black 50.2 56.2 42.8
White 74.9 77 70.8
All Students 68 72 64.1


* graduation rates from 2001

In response to the media... The media, well it's just bad.