Meaningful differences in theeveryday experiences of young American children. This makes it less feasible for poorschool districts. There islittle disagreement here. He proposed that students who did not have viablestrategies for learning be directly taught them. They are placed in a position of starting behind, oftenprovided with fewer resources in poorer school systems, but still expectedto catch up with their more advantaged peers.
The economy suffers from the lack of skilled workers. Children with attention deficit disorder are considered to bevery much at-risk for both educational and behavioral struggles. Another issue is that Engelmann himself is the directorof the program, with a vested interest in its apparent success. Perhaps there is avested interest in maintaining an unequal playing field in which certainchildren are predisposed to failure without a great deal of luck andspecial assistance.
And Risley, T. R. Introduction Statement of the Problem There is a sizable body of children in the United States who enterthe school system with inadequate skills and never catch up. (1998).
(1993). For example, juvenile delinquency is highly correlated withschool problems, including drop-out rates and the inability to readeffectively (Hodgkinson, 1992). The project started in the high schools, moved to the middle schools, and then incorporated more than 3 elementary schools. The former military teacher candidates alsowereinvolved, working with the Project for approximately 4 hours per semester. Many of the reports onworking with at-risk children make general statements about success, but donot necessarily provide the data to support those statements.
At-risk children can experience a very different reality in theclassroom than their not-at-risk peers. Further, Gans and Blyth (199 ) reported on an AMA reportnoting that children today have more stress in their lives and more seriouspsychological problems than those from a generation ago. (199 ). Besides the personal damagedone to the child who always feels a failure, there is considerable socialdamage. TheClearing House, 66, 135-138.
However, many techniques have been devised in order to deal with eachof these problems. That at-risk children who are, by definition, in danger ofschool failure, can be taught effectively in order to alleviate, oreliminate, that risk and help them to succeed.
Pennell, L. In examining this piece of literature, it seems very much to me likethe authors were involved in reinventing the wheel. And Walberg, H. Baltimore, MD: Paul H.
Brookes. Delimitations of the Study This study does not take an experimental design approach. Manning, M. L. This might not be a completely off-the-wall idea.
A good model of a system designed to support at-risk students whichalso served the entire school was a program developed to create a school-based mental health program in one school. She wasworking with a school system in which most students have been upgraded andplaced in regent-level classes, with only students certified as unable tocomplete anything but an IEP diploma exempted. They used the Learning StylesInventory in order to design materials to match learner strengths andcourse requirements. Teachers can be provided with support in many forms, including extra timefor preparation, teacher assistance, mentors, and collaborative teamapproaches.
(1995). Child Welfare, 6 (8), 569-577. 2. The Collaborative Consultation Model is fundamentally a model ofprofessional behavior which emphasizes problem-solving at the school levelthrough the interaction of teachers, administrators, and other staff.
When they are unable to do this, they areadjudged failures. This is similar to the work of several theorists in the field ofprecision teaching. The program used acombination of video technology and computer technology to help studentsanalyze reading passages, learn to read for meaning, and develop accuracyin their reading.
(1999). Schumm, J.
S. For example, Engelmann (1995) recommended an affirmative action planfor at-risk children that starts with preschool-kindergarten. In other words, the more they knew about themselvesand their own capacities, limitations, and tendencies, the more able theywere to manage their own learning process, without special assistance.
Mamchur (199 ) further indicated that students thrived when they were ableto match their learning styles to specific study techniques. (1985).
Engelmann(1999) indicated that this is essentially the problem of at-risk children. Because they start at a disadvantage, but are expected to learn materialthat places them at the norm for their grade level, they must actually beable to learn more than the advantaged child in order to end up at the sameplace (Hart & Risley, 1995).
To answer the latter question first, they are considered tobe at-risk for both school failure and behavioral problems. There is a paucity of experimentaldata indicating that any technique or program is successful over the long-term with a wide variety of at-risk students.
They also noted thatteachers should be able to identify at-risk students, plan, implement, andevaluate educational experiences for them, and that they should have theopportunity to work collaboratively with other teachers and parents inhelping at-risk children grow and develop. Technology From a slightly different angle, there are researchers who recommendgood use of new technologies to improve the situation of at-risk children. Janet Coburn (1999) reported on one of those projects, which emphasizedteaching improved reading skills to at-risk children at both elementary andmiddle schools levels.
2. One obvious problemI see here, and in much of the literature, is this focus on developing newprograms or models that are simply retitled projects that use many of thesame basic principles that have already been shown to be effective in manysituations. Thosechildren who are at-risk will not learn, and those children who are not-at-risk are liable to be frustrated in their attempts to learn, too.
Collaborative consultation in theeducation of mildly handicapped and at-risk students. For example, the Office of Special Education reportedthat the dropout rate for disabled students is at least 1 times greaterthan for nondisabled students.
Theory Into Practice, 24(2), 131-134. Planning formainstreamed students requires an entirely new perspective, and generalclassroom teachers express great resistance (Schumm and Vaugh, 1992). This provides the reader with a wealthof information, but not a lot of evidence that one particular model hasshown itself to be productive and effective in many different situations. While many of these models use the sameelements, it still would be helpful to see a sheaf of literature dealingwith the same model and specific techniques in a wide range of settings.
This began with the Learning Technology Center ofPeabody College at Vanderbilt University, which developed a workingrelationship with the Orange County Florida public schools. They are used to planning forwell-behaved and well-organized students who may have different abilitylevels, but are adapted to a traditional classroom situation.
This is acomponent of the at-risk population that needs helpwithin the school system (and outside of it), and teachers need to receivethe training and support to help them feel competent and effective in doingthat. Working with at-risk students There are numerous models and methods available to the teacherseeking to work directly with at-risk children. I will try toidentify some of these in the following paragraphs. The task, therefore, is toidentify those philosophies, models, methods, strategies, and techniqueswhich seem to offer potential for reducing the risk to at-risk children.
And Vaugh, S. As for who the at-risk children are, there are many groups who areconsidered de facto members of this population.
There is an appeal in computers that has beenlost for many children in their struggles with learning to read books. Adaptations for mainstreamed students There are a number of researchers working on materials and techniquesfor making adaptations for mainstreamed children in the general classroom. Success with mainstreaming begins with the planning process, which manygeneral education teachers are afraid of. (1995).
Safran, S. What it reminded me ofwas the Head Start Program, which has accomplished much in the area ofworking with at-risk preschool children. There were 3 middle school students involved in the project, all ofwhom had been identified as at-risk and removed from regular classes. In any event, there is no reason for the high failurerate of at-risk children except political decisionsthat preclude implementation of effective programs supporting both teachersand children.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5