LD Blog

In a letter to the editor (title: “Defining inclusive schools“) of the Melrose (MA) Free Press, a writer who signs as Bob Desmond and identifies himself as “Former Administrator of PPS,” writes about definining inclusion. Overall, Mr. Desmond presents a reasonable discussion of the ideas, arguing that “it was my belief that no categorical considerations should determine placement of children with special needs, and that all decisions would be made by the child’s team on an individual basis.” The letter appears to defend Mr. Desmond’s record from charges that the schools provided too little inclusion during his tenure.

There is much to be said about inclusion, but another topic in Mr. Desmond’s letter caught my eye. He wrote, “Research indicates that a child presenting with a language-based learning disability (dyslexia), benefits from regular classroom interventions, as well as small-group, remedial programs.” I often feel a chafing and want to loosen my collar when I read passages using this language. Phrases such as “research indicates” or “research proves” beg me to ask, “What research?” Show me the data!

Sometimes, when people use those sorts of phrases, there are plenty of data. Often, however, I fear that the phrasing simply stands for something more akin to this: “I believe x is true and if can find an article that proves it.” In general conversation, maybe that’s acceptable, but when one is talking about students’ outcomes, it makes me uncomfortable.