User talk:AlliH/sandbox

Molly's peer review
Overall, the biggest place for you all to keep working seems to be where you've already noted, with finding sources and fleshing out the positions you started to articulate. What you have so far is a good start, but definitely needs the data to back it up, and absolutely a balance of perspectives (and being careful not to claim one side or the other in the debate as absolute fact). I've left some more specific comments below. Keep working! Looking forward to reading this when you've finished!


 * I don't see any major issues with your suggested subheading "Exceptions to Classic Least Restrictive Environment" from my own perspective, although I could foresee that someone in favor of mainstreaming might argue that there is not in fact an exception for Deaf students and that the same logic applies to them (I don't agree, but it's a risk that you run posting on a controversial topic, of course). I might suggest altering it to something like "Arguments for Exceptions..." or "Controversy in Application of...".


 * "The least restrictive environment states that students should be able to be educated in an environment with "non-disabled peers."" I'm not sure this is entirely true. The text of the IDEA requires that students be educated alongside typically developing peers "to the maximum extent appropriate," which I think is a relevant caveat when discussing the case of Deaf children. It also provides that "special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily." So overall it seems shaky to suggest that the text of the law requires students always be educated alongside their typical peers.


 * Definitely keep looking for sources to back up why LRE as it's typically understood may not be appropriate for Deaf children! I would also suggest being wary about making absolute claims when clearly it's still a contentious topic, my own feelings aside. Similarly, for a balanced perspective, you might consider also (fairly) representing the counterarguments. They can coexist in the same Wikipedia article as long as you are clear in your language that both sides have genuine research (or not) to back up their positions, and that you yourselves do not obviously take a side on the matter. I really like your start about the accommodations that can be instituted in other educational environments; just be sure like you noted that there are sources for these, especially regarding their success or lack thereof in meeting children's educational needs "satisfactorily" (as the law requires), bearing in mind the legal argument this stipulation only requires that children be served well enough to get by, not to get A's.


 * Miscellaneous: In this context, I would generally lean towards "deaf," except for "Deaf peers," since I think the LRE argument you are documenting generally seeks to apply itself to most deaf children, who would then become Deaf at a Deaf school. I did not grow up Deaf though and highly recommend getting a second, native Deaf opinion! I've also used "d/Deaf" a lot in my own writing, but again can't say for certain either way.

Ms3630 (talk) 03:03, 20 March 2018 (UTC)