User talk:Reichert21

Welcome!
Hello, Reichert21, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:52, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Feedback
Hi! I have feedback for you, as well as for, , and :


 * Make sure that you avoid using instructional language, as this doesn't fit Wikipedia's style guidelines and also presumes something of the reader as far as what they know (or don't know). The phrase "to clarify" would be seen as an example of this. You should also look over the page on words to avoid as well.


 * This somewhat falls under the prior note, but I wanted to kind of list it separate. When writing, anything that could be seen as an opinion should be attributed. This may seem a little broad, but keep in mind that a lot of things get debated, even when it comes to education and special needs students. To this end, be careful with statements like "Neither mainstreaming or inclusion are appropriate for every child, therefore it is important that an Individual Education Plan (IEP) be developed for students with special-needs to help create a balance between regular classroom exposure and the attention that is needed".
 * The question here is who exactly is saying this? Also, the word 'important' is seen as kind of inherently non-neutral so this should really be attributed to the person - I've gone ahead and done this in the article. The sentences with an "if... then..." type format, which this has, also should definitely be attributed so that it doesn't come across as something that we came up with based on the source material.


 * With sourcing, always use secondary sources if you're citing studies. The reason for this is that studies are primary sources for whatever claims and research were created by its authors. They're also fairly limited in their scope out of necessity, as they can't survey every person or situation, so they often take a very small sample of the whole, which poses an issue of context. What's true for one person or group may not be the same for the next person, especially when taking into consideration things like differences in culture, socioeconomic status, countries, and so on. Secondary sources help provide this context by putting the findings into a broader viewpoint, while also helping to ensure that the findings are valid. (Journals and publishers really only check to make sure that there are no major errors that would immediately invalidate the studies - they don't provide commentary or any in-depth validation of the data.)

Those are pretty much my main notes - I hope that this helps! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:12, 12 December 2018 (UTC)