“Individualized integration opportunities” sounds very familiar! It was one of the suggestions two years ago when they wanted to change his placement to substantially separate. The problem with this approach in practice is that the language is so vague that it’s useless. It becomes what is convenient for whoever involved (teachers) and not necessarily what is needed for each child.

Monkey is a very good imitator. He is like a sponge soaking up the words and actions around him…good or bad. I’ve never been satisfied that he would get enough exposure to age appropriate behaviors and language simply by having an art class or sharing story time once a week with a classroom of typical children who would be strangers essentially.

I think the strongest argument that was put forth for creating this classroom was that the kids were succeeding, even excelling, in the current integrated environment. The teachers identified twelve current students who would benefit for continuing the model into kindergarten. I wonder how many of those kids would have had to make successful arguments for mainstreamed classrooms with an aide to make it cost effective?