Special Schools and the Education Bill
Correspondence
Sir, tjhere has been general approval of J, s requirement that all children should have the Ration suited to their age, aptitude and ability, and J??se interested in handicapped children have welcomed ? e clause stressing ” the need for securing that provision nrtHac!e for pupils who suffer from any disability of mind body by providing, either in Special Schools or otheiww > difCu?(. ed”cational treatment ” appropriate for the ‘^ability, in the practical interpretation of the Bill s t Usps there may, however, be difference of opinion a what is the most suitable educational treatment lor u5 group of mentally subnormal children which lies rftvvfen those deemed to be ineducable and those, tin 1^ whose needs can be met by special educa?nal treatment in the ordinary school.
the purpose of this letter is to stress the fact that there e subnormal children, relatively, however, few in oni ur’ whose ” special educational treatment can nly be given adequately in a separate Special School .^’i-onment, s;nce their primary need is removal from ^itk n8 effect of association in school and class a majority of children who are superior to them in usability and social adaptability.
, ” should be noted, and is apt to be overlooked, that ,tine children, even when associated with the dull ar dnii much in the minority. It is true that they, like the in!l’ need special methods of teaching, smaller classe more practical curriculum. But these alone do rp! to sive the more subnormal children that seltsPect which comes to them when, no longer the inferior members of the group but in company more or less with J?.Ua.ls> they recognize that the life of the school community depends on their efforts, that their success is the J|rst concern of their teachers, that the little responsiDlIlties of the school and the leadership in games and other activities are theirs by natural right, not by condescension however sympathetic, and that their progress, though slow, is not overshadowed by that of a great many others. Children, even those who are mentally subnormal, are quick to see through the most well-meaning ruses of adults, and it is not to be expected, nor would it be right to expect, that their brighter schoolfellows should give place continually to these weaker members. Even were such an unnatural adjustment made in the classroom, in the free play of the playground the brighter children would naturally dominate.
Long and varied experience of teaching children classified as educable mental defectives, as well as those merely dull, of examining (in association with medical officers) thousands of children referred for Special Schools’ examination, and of inspecting and observing children in Special Schools and classes, leaves me with no doubt that there are children whose only chance of thriving socially and of developing to the full educationally lies in their admission to a Special School. Few who have had first-hand and understanding contact with these children will deny this, unless blinded by theory, by ill-judged sentimentality or, at lowest, by fear of expense. In spite of the much talked of ” stigma ” and the natural regret of the parents that their children are not fit to be educated in ordinary schools, it is an obvious fact that the children themselves are happy in Special Schools where they are free for a whole school day from comparison with and criticism by other brighter children. No one who cares for children would want to separate them from the ordinary group except in their best interests and for their happiness, but though opinions may differ at the upper and lower borderline as to the need of individual children for education in a Special School, the fact remains that there are in the community children whose general mental feebleness demands the very special treatment of a separate school environment. Some people have been frightened by the numbers as foreshadowed in surveys, e.g. those of the Wood report. My own opinion, based on years of work with the selecting medical officers, is that the number of mentally handicapped children requiring Special School teaching is not as great as such reports indicate. It must be remembered that selection is an individual thing. There is no question of assessing examination results and transferring everyone below a certain I.Q. or of so many years’ educational backwardness to a Special School. By such a method the number would indeed be large. In fact, however, the selection is of individual children, of ” Johns ” or ” Marys ” with full consideration of every factor of their case, their I.Q., their temperament, their social adjustment, their home environment? material and psychological?their physical history and so on. Everything is weighed up and the decision made in the best interests of the child as a whole. With selection of this type, I doubt if, even with.full ascertainment, the number selected for Special Schools would exceed 1 per cent, of the school population, especially if everything possible were being done in the ordinary schools for the treatment of the backward and dull children. Increasing social security, attention to nutrition, earlier medical supervision and extension 01 nursery school education should have their influence’ too, in reducing the numbers who appear to need Specif School education. But in spite of every ameliorating influence there will always be a proportion of children who will need education in Special Schools and who wil? only by care and education in that environment, specially planned for their development and needs, be fitted, vvitn such after-care as is necessary, to take a lowly useful part in the community when they leave schoolSome people, while admitting this, object on grounds oi practicability, but with the Education Bill’s provision f?* boarding as well as day Special Schools and for join1 committees of neighbouring Education Authorities, there should be little or no difficulty in making arrangements for the Special School education of all children who need it, even of those in country districts.
Yours etc., Mary M. Lindsay. Liverpool. {Correspondence on this letter is invited.?Ed.)
Disclaimer
The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:
Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.
Material that is in the public domain
Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.