Leading Theories for Special Education with a Synopsis and a Comparative Analysis

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Addressing the needs of learners with disabilities or disadvantages is a challenging task as the process of accommodating the needs above may become extremely intricate. Since special needs learners are often unable to communicate their needs directly, the process of locating the subject matter often turns into guesswork (Farahani & Maleki, 2014). Herein lies the necessity to identify a proper theoretical framework that will, later on, serve as the foundation for building an efficient teaching strategy (Kiraz & Ozdemir, 2006). For these purposes, three primary theories need to be viewed as the foundation of the teaching philosophy since they provide the background for the teacher to locate the students’ needs and for the learners to bloom as explorers and attain the corresponding academic skills.

As suggested by Howard Gardner in the 1980s, the theory of Multiple Intelligences subverted the traditional notion of measuring people’s mental abilities merely by applying an IQ test. According to the foundations of the framework under analysis, the general notion of intelligence is composed of a variety of elements, including the following; linguistic, logical-mathematic, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalist intelligence (Armstrong, 2014). The significance of the Multiple Intelligence (MI) theory can hardly be underrated when it comes to locating the strategy for teaching students with disabilities. However, by far the greatest advantage of the theory in question concerns the fact that it compels the teacher to focus on the students’ unique abilities and talents as opposed to their limitations. Moreover, it is essential that the MI theory promotes the incorporation of technological advances into the learning process. The use of IT devices creates premises for engaging learners into being active and encouraging them to participate in the classroom activities, including individual and group assignments (Montgomery & Sanders, 2012). Researches point to the fact that the

theoretical framework under analysis, though being a comparatively recent incorporation into the current set of theories of teaching students with disabilities, has already warranted application in the corresponding setting (Armstrong, 2014). Therefore, though having a very short history and having gained wide popularity only in 1980s, the theoretical approach of multiple intelligences has defined the further course of the development of the target educational setting. Unfortunately, the adoption of the MI theory as the primary means of teaching learners with disabilities the basic skills remains hypothetical for the most part, the key reason being the lack of financial resources for supplying the necessary devices to all learner with disabilities on the statewide scale (Handler, 2010). While it is unlikely to affect the curriculum significantly, it will provide teachers with the tools that will enable them to promote active knowledge acquisition among learners.

Another viable theory that can be used as the basis for encouraging special needs students to develop academic skills, Vygotsky’s framework needs to be brought up as the primary tool for addressing the target learners’ needs. Arguably a rather ancient framework compared to the latest innovative solutions in the environment of special education, it still helps identify the needs of learners with disadvantages. Whereas it is not as groundbreaking as the MI approach since Vygotsky’s philosophy does not lead to the recognition of unique talents of children with special needs, the approach under analysis, nonetheless, serves as a decent foil for inviting learners to participate and prompting their enthusiasm toward the process of knowledge and skills acquisition. The efficacy of the theory under analysis is explained from the perspective of the concept that is known nowadays as the zone of proximal development. Typically identified as the area between the range of the activities that a learner can carry out without being assisted by an instructor and the ones that require the help of the teacher, the identified concept can be viewed as the foundation for training new skills with the help of scaffolding.

Researchers point to the fact that the concept of scaffolding, or an instructed accomplishment of specific tasks and academic goals, should be seen as the primary means for learners with disabilities or disadvantages to develop the necessary academic independence (Handler, 2010). For instance, Radford, Bonsaquet, Webster, and Blatchford (2015) assert that, by scaffolding learners with special needs, teachers perform the support role, which “is especially important because it includes features associated with how to keep children on task, motivated and with reduced frustration” (Radford et al., 2015, p. 8).Therefore, the application of Vygotsky’s framework also defines the academic success of the learners with disabilities. It could be argued that, though Vygotsky does not spell out the significance of academic independence in the target environment, he still incorporates the concept into the teaching approach, as the scaffolding process helps learners become self-reliant and, thus, develop the qualities that they will need to become self-sufficient in the learning process. The above properties of the theory are the key reasons why it defines the current curriculum in most schools (Farahani & Maleki, 2014).

Last but definitely not least, the theory suggested by Albert Bandura needs to be brought up. The framework under analysis, commonly known as the Social Learning Theory (SLT) puts a very strong emphasis on the social interactions of the students as op[posed to the focus on their academic achievements (Lamport, 2014). While seemingly contradictory to the primary objectives of a teacher, the above framework, in fact, can be deemed as exemplary in terms of meeting the needs of students with disabilities. Indeed, a closer look at the target demographic will show that they lack the environment, in which they will be capable of developing their social skills.

In light of the fact that the communication issue is the primary concern for the students above, it is strongly advised that they tenets of the SLT should be applied to the current educational setting so that the students with special needs could become an integral part of the society and communicate with its members successfully (Handler, 2010). While the significance of SLT is not currently emphasized in the educational context to the point where it affects the curriculum (Young, 2013), it still plays a significant part in shaping the teachers’ approach to learners. Therefore, claiming that the theory does not affect the current curriculum would be quite a stretch. Nevertheless, seeing how important social interactions are for students with special needs, the urgency of incorporating the SLT concept into the present-day curriculum needs to be brought up (Farahani & Maleki, 2014).

Creating the environment that can be deemed as favorable for students with special needs is a very difficult task. To make sure that every single learner receives the support that they need, one will have to come up with the approach that will help teach the learner the necessary skills and provide them with the information that will serve as the foundation for the further independent learning. The combination of the MI concept, Vygotsky’s framework, and the SLT is bound to create the necessary setting for accomplishing the above goal.

Reference List

Armstrong, T. (2014). You’re smarter than you think: A kid’s guide to multiple intelligences. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.

Farahani, M. F., & Maleki, M. (2014). A survey on tendency toward curriculum ideologies among academic board members in educational sciences faculties–Theran 2010–11. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2392-2396.

Handler, B. (2010). Teacher as curriculum leader: A consideration of the appropriateness of that role assignment to classroom-based practitioners. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 3(3), 32-42.

Kiraz, E., & Ozdemir, D. (2006). The relationship between educational ideologies and technology acceptance in pre-service teachers. Educational Technology & Society, 9(2), 152-165.

Lamport, M. A. (2014). Special needs students in inclusive classrooms: The impact of social interaction on educational outcomes for learners with emotional and behavioral disabilities. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 1(5), 54-69.

Montgomery, S. V., & Sanders, J. M. (2012). The effect of computer software use verses traditional teaching methods in ethnically and linguistically diverse students acquisition of addition and subtraction skills. Journal of Border Educational Research, 5(1), 62-70.

Razfar, A. (2012). Language ideologies and curriculum studies: an empirical approach to” worthwhile” questions. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 28(1), 127.

Young, M. (2013). Overcoming the crisis in curriculum theory: A knowledge-based approach. Journal of curriculum studies, 45(2), 101-118.

Click Here To Order Now!

Leading Theories for Special Education with a Synopsis and a Comparative Analysis

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)