<p>“teachers are not being trained for it, given the support needed for it, or even met with the acknowledgment that it is an increasing, implicit responsibility.”</p>
<p>I respectfully disagree that it should be an implicit, let alone explicit (which it often is, in my State) responsibility. At-risk students (clinically at risk – whether that be psychiatrically, socially, or criminally) belong in facilities that serve those needs. Now, students with psychiatric conditions that do not adjust well to group situations, still need to be educated. Same for other varieties of at-risk situations which are similarly disruptive. That’s why there need to be Special Needs Magnet Schools which feature in-house psychiatric, social service, etc. staff, so that such students can be both clinically treated and educated. I am not a licensed psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker. Nor have I graduated from a police academy. Pretending to perform those roles is unethical, illegal, and ineffective. Students who cannot be effectively mainstreamed should not be, period. Doesn’t work for them, doesn’t work for their classmates, doesn’t work for the teacher, and is an all-around major rip-off for every taxpayer.</p>
<p>I’ve mentioned before that I once taught in a school which included one special class for Developmentally Disabled (combo of trainable & educable). It worked perfectly. The rest of the school respected those students beautifully. It lent a special kind of humility to the school. We became a model for the district. The same thing could happen for other kinds of extreme situations, dsabilities – of which there are too many in regular classrooms now (PTSD, Aspergers, Autism, Tourettes, many other varieties of situations causing dysfunction & requiring one-on-one & small group).</p>