Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities - Division on ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ior. Religious teach<strong>in</strong>g often def<strong>in</strong>es what people should believe to be true about the world around them, <strong>and</strong> it prescribes how people should act <strong>in</strong> accordance with these beliefs (Goldberg, 2006). Religious beliefs have been the foundations of civilizations. Public <strong>and</strong> private behaviors were usually governed by the codes of conduct described <strong>in</strong> religious law. It is relatively impossible to parse religious <strong>and</strong> civil leadership <strong>in</strong> ancient (<strong>and</strong> not so ancient) cultures. Even today despite public discourse around the need to ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> a secular, civil society <strong>in</strong> this country <strong>and</strong> elsewhere <strong>in</strong> the world, it is naïve to underestimate the extent to which religious thought <strong>in</strong>fluences th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g on a wide variety of issues, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g disability. To deny or ignore religious <strong>in</strong>fluences on conceptualizations of disability is to overlook a profound aspect of the human experience <strong>and</strong> our underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g of what it means to have <strong>and</strong> live with a disability. As special educators <strong>and</strong> researchers we are just beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g to explore the relationships between the <strong>in</strong>fluence of religion on cultural <strong>and</strong> personal underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>gs of disability. Religion <strong>in</strong> America Americans often po<strong>in</strong>t to the separation of church <strong>and</strong> state m<strong>and</strong>ated by the First Amendment as proof that we live <strong>in</strong> a secular society. However, momentary consideration of the follow<strong>in</strong>g examples <strong>in</strong>dicates that religious thought clearly pervades our th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g. An obvious example is the cont<strong>in</strong>ued legal debate over the teach<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>in</strong>telligent design (Slack, 2007). Religious beliefs have always pervaded attitudes <strong>and</strong> policies on a variety of controversial issues. The deliverance narratives of the Hebrew <strong>and</strong> Christian traditions certa<strong>in</strong>ly <strong>in</strong>fluenced the debates around Civil Rights <strong>and</strong> desegregation (Cone, 1975; K<strong>in</strong>g, 1968). Another example is the <strong>in</strong>teraction between religion <strong>and</strong> culture that is evident <strong>in</strong> public school vacation calendars. Without fail, extended periods of vacation co<strong>in</strong>cide with major Christian holidays. For an example from public policy, objections to gay marriage are fundamentally religious objections. Religion matters <strong>in</strong> modern America <strong>and</strong> yet we rarely explore how it relates to beliefs about students with disabilities. Underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g what religions say about disability can deepen the ability to underst<strong>and</strong> how to improve the services provided to students with <strong>in</strong>tellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities <strong>and</strong> their families. Religion <strong>and</strong> Disability With these issues <strong>and</strong> ideas <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d, we can beg<strong>in</strong> to explore images of disability <strong>in</strong> three major world religions. The <strong>in</strong>tent here is simply to argue that multicultural teacher preparation for special educators is <strong>in</strong>complete unless it <strong>in</strong>cludes an exam<strong>in</strong>ation of religion. It is <strong>in</strong> the best <strong>in</strong>terests of our students <strong>and</strong> their families that we tra<strong>in</strong> <strong>and</strong> expect special educators to reflect on the ways religious ideas <strong>in</strong>fluence practice. We make no claims that our research on religious images of disability is comprehensive. Choices about what <strong>in</strong>formation to <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>and</strong> exclude <strong>in</strong> this discussion were made largely on the basis of the big ideas available <strong>in</strong> a survey of the literature. What we have tried to do is gather sufficient <strong>in</strong>formation to open the conversation. With this goal <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d, this article only provides an <strong>in</strong>troduction to important scholarly work <strong>in</strong> disability studies <strong>and</strong> religious studies. Our hope is that this <strong>in</strong>troduction will <strong>in</strong>spire our colleagues <strong>in</strong> special education to further explore the scholarly work represented here <strong>and</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>ue to reflect on issues around religion, disability, <strong>and</strong> special education. Religion <strong>in</strong> this discussion is limited to the three Abrahamic traditions: Judaism, Christianity, <strong>and</strong> Islam. The simple criteria for this project were (a) religions with which the authors have sufficient familiarity to comprehend the scholarly work available, <strong>and</strong> (b) religions that are prevalent enough <strong>in</strong> the United States that most teachers will have at least heard of them <strong>and</strong> have an elemental sense of their belief systems. Abrahamic Traditions 296 / <strong>Education</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-September 2009 Judaism, Christianity, <strong>and</strong> Islam fall under the umbrella of the Abrahamic traditions because all three recognize the historical figure Abraham <strong>and</strong> his descendants as central <strong>and</strong> orig<strong>in</strong>al figures <strong>in</strong> the culture of the faith. There is significant overlap <strong>in</strong> the sacred texts of each faith <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong> their treatment of people with disabilities. Similarly, each faith is <strong>in</strong>consistent <strong>and</strong> seem<strong>in</strong>gly contradictory <strong>in</strong> the images of
disability that are conveyed through sacred text <strong>and</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>gs. When viewed as literary works <strong>and</strong> policy documents it is evident that they have evolved <strong>and</strong> changed over time as a function of social need <strong>and</strong> cultural change. It is easy to see that contradictions <strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>gs are the result of changes to documents that prescribed behavior <strong>and</strong> functioned as civil law for many centuries. However, the l<strong>in</strong>ger<strong>in</strong>g consequences of these <strong>in</strong>consistencies are ambivalence <strong>and</strong> confusion among teach<strong>in</strong>gs about the mean<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> orig<strong>in</strong> of disabilities as well as the ways <strong>in</strong> which people with disabilities should be treated. On one h<strong>and</strong> there are historical narratives connect<strong>in</strong>g disability to evil. However, people with disabilities are also held up as objects of pity <strong>and</strong> function as opportunities for the faithful to demonstrate their own goodness through acts of charity (Rose 1997). Recently, however, religious <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>and</strong> spiritual communities have begun to underst<strong>and</strong> that <strong>in</strong>dividuals with <strong>in</strong>tellectual <strong>and</strong> developmental disabilities have spiritual lives <strong>and</strong> religious needs that are fully their own, <strong>and</strong> quite similar to the needs of <strong>in</strong>dividuals without disabilities (Coll<strong>in</strong>s, Epste<strong>in</strong>, Rice, & Lowe, 2003; Sw<strong>in</strong>ton, 1997; Yong, 2007). Judaism The Hebrew bible’s central character, Yahweh, a s<strong>in</strong>gle deity, is responsible for conditions of disability <strong>and</strong> this is a major shift from previous polytheistic traditions <strong>in</strong> ancient Mesopotamia (Hentrich, 2007; Walls, 2007). In the Yahweh stories, disabilities are generally negative degradations of the perfect body God bestowed upon Adam <strong>in</strong> the creation story. As such, disabilities are perceived as div<strong>in</strong>e punishments. People with disabilities are considered impure <strong>and</strong> they carry the danger of br<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g pollution to their surround<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>and</strong> other people (Hentrich). The emphases on perfection surround<strong>in</strong>g the ritual acts <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> mak<strong>in</strong>g sacrifices as offer<strong>in</strong>gs to God as prescribed <strong>in</strong> Hebrew scripture conflate the ideas of pollution <strong>and</strong> disability (Melcher, 2007). Jewish law describes <strong>in</strong> detail the need for perfection <strong>in</strong> both the sacrificial object <strong>and</strong> the preparer of the sacrifice (Miles, 2002a). Although there are legal prohibitions about who can perform certa<strong>in</strong> k<strong>in</strong>ds of ritu- alistic tasks, such as an <strong>in</strong>sistence that the priest who exam<strong>in</strong>es an animal before sacrifice have clear vision, there is no scriptural precedent for exclud<strong>in</strong>g a man with bl<strong>in</strong>dness from memoriz<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> speak<strong>in</strong>g the sacred texts (Miles, 2002b; Wertlieb, 1988). The David stories, however, communicate more negative images of disability <strong>and</strong> the roles for people with disabilities <strong>in</strong> society. David is understood to st<strong>and</strong> for an idealized man <strong>in</strong> ancient Israelite culture (Hentrich). As David moves to depose Saul <strong>in</strong> order to establish the dynastic house of David, Saul’s son Ishboshet is killed, yet his other son, Meribaal, is spared. Apparently, Meribaal is no threat to David because Meribaal has a physical disability that legally excludes him from assum<strong>in</strong>g the throne (Hentrich; Schipper, 2006). Although the historical record is unclear as to the exact nature of Meribaal’s disability, he is described as “lame” or “crippled”. (Hentrich). The legal basis of Meribaal’s <strong>in</strong>ability to rule is unclear. It is possible that either purity laws associated with religious practice or civil laws about physical disabilities were responsible for his disqualification. What is important <strong>in</strong> the story is the fact that David did not kill Meribaal because he was perceived as no threat because of his disability. The Meribaal story communicates a status of reduced manhood <strong>and</strong> otherness result<strong>in</strong>g from physical disabilities. The exclusion of persons with disabilities from the temple also appears to orig<strong>in</strong>ate <strong>in</strong> the David stories. As David moves to conquer Jerusalem, the defend<strong>in</strong>g army surrounds the city with soldiers who have disabilities-either congenital or result<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>in</strong>juries or illness. The tactical reasons for this action are unclear but some scholars suggest that cultural taboos <strong>in</strong> ancient Jerusalem would have caused David to hesitate to engage with such a force for fear of pollution (Heller, <strong>in</strong> Hentrich, 2007). A more positive <strong>in</strong>terpretation offered by Brunet (<strong>in</strong> Hentrich) is that the city was surround<strong>in</strong>g itself with a “moral wall” which David would not dare to attack <strong>in</strong> fear of div<strong>in</strong>e vengeance that would convey disabilities upon David’s soldiers. David, however, cont<strong>in</strong>ued undeterred <strong>and</strong> after assum<strong>in</strong>g power <strong>in</strong> Jerusalem banned people with disabilities from the temple (Hentrich). It is unclear whether David was exact<strong>in</strong>g revenge on those who opposed him or if he was concerned Multiculturalism, Religion, <strong>and</strong> Disability / 297
Page 1 and 2: Education
Page 7 and 8: Best Practices in
Page 9 and 10: plication facts to middle school st
Page 11: Multiculturalism, Religion, <strong
Page 15 and 16: the rest of society until acted upo
Page 17 and 18: abilities as an opportunity for spi
Page 19 and 20: ability and qualit
Page 21 and 22: TABLE 1 Dolly Gray Children’s Lit
Page 23 and 24: who did not clearly have a developm
Page 25 and 26: TABLE 3 Juvenile Literature with Ma
Page 27 and 28: TABLE 5 Characterizations i
Page 29 and 30: drome in The Duche
Page 31 and 32: Special Olympics). Most of the recr
Page 33 and 34: “add depth and m
Page 35 and 36: Gresham, Kern, Barreras, Thornton,
Page 37 and 38: number of cases of sin</str
Page 39 and 40: TABLE 1 Continued
Page 53 and 54: Target Behaviors A number of social
Page 55 and 56: to promote social skills in
Page 57 and 58: *Hine, J. F., & Wo
Page 59 and 60: Learn by Doing: A
Page 61 and 62: implemented is consistent across pe
Page 63 and 64:
concludes the program with an empha
Page 65 and 66:
TABLE 2 Scholar Pretest Directions:
Page 67 and 68:
dren with autism. If, through these
Page 69 and 70:
classroom. This program not only ga
Page 71 and 72:
tism and Other <st
Page 73 and 74:
Typically students with low IQs, <s
Page 75 and 76:
applied the vocabulary word to a gi
Page 77 and 78:
Jacob, Carl, and R
Page 79 and 80:
ting them apart. J
Page 81 and 82:
cannot provide this type of <strong
Page 83 and 84:
Pentop Computers as Tools for Teach
Page 85 and 86:
Okolo, & Courtad, 2007). Smart toys
Page 87 and 88:
computer for all multiplication pro
Page 89 and 90:
software immediately repeated the n
Page 91 and 92:
tool. Prior to the in</stro
Page 93 and 94:
was first introduc
Page 95 and 96:
ecause all of the students would be
Page 97 and 98:
Effectiveness of Parent and
Page 99 and 100:
is well known that when parents lea
Page 101 and 102:
tion Program (PTCP) for teach<stron
Page 103 and 104:
(reinforcers, prom
Page 105 and 106:
Figure 2. Percentage of correct res
Page 107 and 108:
Figure 4. Percentage of correct res
Page 109 and 110:
is not progressing
Page 111 and 112:
care and domestic
Page 113 and 114:
enced based on IEP goals, whereas r
Page 115 and 116:
TABLE 1 Definition
Page 117 and 118:
to the criteria in
Page 119 and 120:
Figure 2. Percentage of occurrence
Page 121 and 122:
intervention was s
Page 123 and 124:
goal setting on ta
Page 125 and 126:
Increasing Compreh
Page 127 and 128:
plied systematic promptin</
Page 129 and 130:
TABLE 2 Book Adaptations Book Dirty
Page 131 and 132:
Intervention. Like baselin<
Page 133 and 134:
Figure 2. Number of correct respons
Page 135 and 136:
mined is that this
Page 137 and 138:
Evaluating the Acc
Page 139 and 140:
TABLE 1 Characteristics of children
Page 141 and 142:
educators. These educators were enr
Page 143 and 144:
TABLE 3 Mean ratin
Page 145 and 146:
could help a teacher better underst
show all

Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities - Division on ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?