Abigail Meyers inclusion experience at Kohl Elementary in Broomfield,

Colorado (Boulder Valley School District) is reflective of Dr. Friends statement in our
textbook that inclusive schools are possible and necessary for twenty-first century
education (Friend, 2014, p. 24). I strongly commend Abigails teacher, Racheal
Edmonds, for her courage, creativity and dedication in finding successful blended
teaching/learning pathways that allow Abigail to be a true (i.e., not token) part of
her general education community. I particularly valued Edmonds comment, It's
been such an eye opening experienceWhat I'm doing to modify for one child spills
over and helps all the children. Everyone benefits," including herself, the
paraprofessionals involved; indeed, what would appear to be the entire school
community. I appreciated the comments of Anna Stewart (head of Boulder Valley
School Districts parent resource center): "You see how independent kids can
becomeThere's less emphasis on their disabilities than on what they can doHer
disability is a reality," she said. "She's not going to outgrow it, but it's not the
definition of who she is." What an empowering statement.
The most troubling drawback in Abigails situation is that her parents had to
make significant real estate choices (i.e., where to raise their family) based on
Abigails special needs. Though the article states that the type of program Abigail is
receiving in Broomfield is a multi-year effort, the fact that Abigails experience is
still considered unusual and innovative is unfortunate. I find myself asking, Why
isnt this the norm? Friend asks a similar question, noting, Despite the fact that
the parents of children with disabilities were leaders in the educational movement
that greatly increased inclusive practicesthis goal has only been partly achieved
how decisions are made regarding where students are educated and how often and
why those decisions are revisited have not been adequately addressed (Friend,
2014, p. 270).
I found myself all the more committed to fostering appropriately applied
inclusion going forward. I had an additional takeaway, too. At times, its the
seemingly little things that carry a big impact. Racheal Edmonds encouraging
praise to Abigail, Thats very good! Kiss your brain! was very heartwarming. No
matter how old our students areindeed, no matter the age for anyone!...who
amongst us wouldnt cherish hearing this from a respected mentor? I believe this
encourages good self-esteem, wonderful self-care and can see the connections to
the work of Dr. Kristen D. Neff, Associate Professor of Social Work at The University
of Texas at Austin. She has built her academic career around helping adults
understand/accept the value of self-compassion and self-support, especially integral
in helping overcome shame-based experiences that often have roots in an
individuals home and school personal histories. Here, Ms. Edmonds is helping build
such vital practices at an early age. Yay her!! And good lesson for us...

In what three important ways does the instruction of students with intellectual
disabilities/mental retardation differ from students with a learning disability label?

Intellectual Disabilities vs. Learning Differences

EDUC 5320 Exceptionality in Todays Schools
Dr. Kirsten Allman
November 10, 2015
Carolyn Elizabeth Barrette

Intellectual Disabilities vs. Learning Differences

It is often assumed that individuals with intellectual disabilities/mental retardation

and those with learning disabilities can/should be addressed in the classroom using
similar pedagogical styles. At first glance, this could seem logical; after all, both groups
have difficulties with academic achievement and progress (Introduction, 2007) and
difficulties in social relationships are common for both groups. Both can experience
loneliness and isolation as a result of their disabilities. Dr. Marilyn Friend notes that
many students with intellectual disabilitiestend to be less accepted by their peers and
more likely rejected by them. She further explains that many students with learning
disabilities have some type of deficit in the area of social skills (Friend, 2014, p. 148).
Yet, instruction of these students shouldneeds tovary depending upon the type of

disability present. Many reasons for this can be examined; among the most important
are:
Comment One:
Intellectual disabilities/Mental retardation: Learning issues are primarily related to
mental retardation, developmental delays or emotional disturbance. Causes can be
prenatal, perinatal or postnatal. Dr. Friend reminds us that a student is identified as
having an intellectual disability only if his IQ score places him at approximately two
standard deviations or more below the mean or average score of 100. She is quick to
note, however, that IQ scores are approximationsand should not by themselves
dictate decisions regarding students (Friend, 2014, pp. 257-258). A broader picture that
includes consideration of a students adaptive skills integration and cognitive functioning
should have a significant impact on such determinations.

Learning disability label: By contrast, learning disability problems are not due to mental
retardation, developmental delays or emotional disturbance. The National Organization
of Special Education Teachers (NOSET) explains,
Research suggests that learning disabilities are caused by differences in
how a persons brain works and how it processes information. Children
with learning disabilities are not stupid or lazy. In fact, they usually have
average or above average intelligence, but their brains process
information differently. A learning disability affects the way kids of
average to above average intelligence receive, process, or express
information (Introduction, 2007).

Analysis/Resulting instructional differences: The differences between how the brain

works in these two unique populations often suggests that different teaching styles and
environments be applied. Primary educational pathways for students with intellectual
disabilities can include planning for generalization and making abstract concepts more
concretea life skills curriculum and functional academics are also key foci (Friend,
2014, p. 271). For those with learning differences, the concepts of least restrictive
environment and best practices for identifying and providing needed school services
meet. Appropriate inclusion is the goal and is on the increase for both populations. Yet,
Friend reminds us, Being inclusive does not mean that students never leave the
general education setting. Instead it means that consideration is given to how a
students needs can be met within the classroom context before resorting to instruction
in a separate setting Friend, 2014, p. 159).
Comment Two:
Intellectual disabilities/Mental retardation: Dr. Friend cites a 1982 federal definition
(utilized in IDEA) and its American Association on Mental Retardation 1 (AAMR) 1992
extension (Friend, 2014, p. 252). The first definition reads that an intellectual disability is
significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning, existing concurrently with
deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested during the developmental period, that
adversely affects a childs educational performance. (IDEA 20 U.S.C. 1401 [2004], 20
C.F.R. 300.8[c][6]). The updated, newer definition states, Intellectual disability is
characterized by significant limitations on both intellectual functioning and in adaptive
behavior as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical adaptive skills. This disability
1 AAMR, now renamed the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
(AAIDD)

originates before age eighteen (AAIDD, 2010).

Learning disability label: NOSET states, Because of the multidisciplinary nature of the
field, there is ongoing debate on the issue of definition, and currently at least twelve
definitions appear in the professional literature (Introduction, 2007).

Dr. Friend confirms

considerable controversy still exists over what a learning disability really isdiscussion about the term
learning disabilities continue (Friend, 2014, pp. 137, 140) and because most states are required to adhere
to the provisions of the federal special education law (Friend, 2014, p. 139), the majority use the following
federal definition: Specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more the basic psychological
processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that many manifest itself in
imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell or do mathematical calculation, including conditions
such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.
Specific learning disability does not include a learning problem that arises primarily as the result of visual,
hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, or emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural or
economic disadvantage. (IDEA 20

U.S.C. 1401 [2004], 20 C.F.R. 300.8[c][10]).

Analysis/ Resulting instructional differences: The field of intellectual disabilities and

mental retardation has been on the national education radar since the early nineteenth
century. A recently published biography of Rosemary Kennedy2, the intellectually
disabled first daughter of national political scions Joseph P. and Rose F. Kennedy 3,
offers fresh insight into and a fascinating account of the progress and plights of the
mentally disabled in the early twentieth century. By the 1940s and 50s, many leaders
2 Larson, K. C. (October 6, 2015). Rosemary: The hidden Kennedy daughter. New York, NY: Houghton
Mifflin Harcourt.
3 As well as sister to statesmen John F., Robert F. and Theodore M. Kennedy

in the field were emerging. By contrast, Dr. Friend summarizes, Compared to other
disability areas, the field of learning disabilities has had a relatively brief and intense
evolution (Friend, 2014, p. 136). By the close of the twentieth century, then-prevailing
wisdom dictated that the intellectually disabled were best kept segregated from the
traditional mainstream student population, i.e., seclusion rather than inclusion. Today,
scenarios vary. A common setting for these students is a special education classroom
for more than 60% of the day (Friend, 2014, p. 268). For students with learning
disabilities, ideally, significant efforts to provide accommodations allowing the student to
participate well in mainstream general classrooms is considered a best practice.
Comment Three:
Intellectual disabilities/Mental retardation: Because students with intellectual disabilities
typically process at a level significantly below what is considered the mean or average,
they are often performing to the best of their ability, meaning their underachievement is
explanable.

Learning disability label: NOSET has identified that for students with learning
disabilities, Discrepancies exist between a persons potential for learning and what that
person actually learns (Introduction, 2007). Dr. Friend arrives at a similar conclusion:
Students with learning disabilitiesgenerally share the characteristic of unexplained
underachievement (Friend, 2014, p. 140).

Analysis/Resulting instructional differences: As a consequence of the diverse

foundations for underachievement in these two populations, differing approaches are

(and should be) taken to optimize progress for both types of students. For students with
intellectual disabilities, this can include detailed task analysis to ascertain how teachers
can [best] help these students master more and more complex tasks (Friend, 2014, p.
272). Additionally, peer tutoring has been identified as effective for such students.
Alternatively, the focus for students with learning disabilities include direct instruction 4
and strategy instruction5 to enhance and optimize their learning skills to perform at an
comparable (even if alternative) level as their mainstream peers.

References
Friend, M. P. (2014). Special education: Contemporary perspectives for school
professionals (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Introduction to learning disabilities. (2007). National Organization of Special Education
Teachers, https://www.naset.org/2522.0.html.

4 A highly-structured, teacher-led approach for teaching students across academic areas (Friend, 2014, p.
170)
5 Which includes steps to guide students so that they can achieve independence in completing common
academic tasks (Friend, 2014, p. 170)