Real Life Issues Instruction for Students with Exceptionality

Sandra Beyda Lorie, Ph.D.

Strengths and challenges of students with exceptionalities

Students with exceptionality are a heterogeneous group with unique abilities and learning styles. Although we use terms of disability to classify in order to provide appropriate services (e.g. learning disability, mental retardation) these labels have the undesirable effect of eclipsing an individual student’s strengths. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990 initiated the use of “person first” language to remind us to consider the child as a person and not a disability. In fact, students with exceptionality are courageous individuals who often work harder than students without disabilities to remediate or compensate for their area(s) of weakness.

That said students with exceptionality face a number of challenges that impact real life issues instruction. The five major areas of vulnerability are problems with cognition, perception, language, social skills, and academic learning. In the area of cognition, problems may be characterized by deficits in memory, attention, and executive control functioning or the ability to evaluate an instructional task, and to recognize, monitor and allocate strategies that might be applied to that task. Difficulty with perception is characterized primarily by problems with auditory, visual or visual-motor integration. Language deficits either in the area of form (phonology, morphology, syntax), content (semantics) or use (pragmatics) occurs in some 60% of students with learning disabilities (Kavale & Forness, 1987). Language impairment has also been implicated in children and youth diagnosed with emotional disturbance and/or behavioral disorders (Nelson, Benner, & Rogers, 2003; Rinaldi, 2003). These language problems often impact social competence and also academic skills such as reading and writing. Some individuals with disabilities have problems in mathematics and skills related to academics including the ability to think, study and organize time and learning materials. Exceptionality/Special Education includes students who are gifted and/or talented and may exhibit advanced development in one or more areas of academic achievement or distinguish themselves based on their exceptional artistic or athletic ability. Twice-exceptional students, those who possess giftedness and either a learning disability, physical or health impairment or an emotional/behavioral disorder, may still require remediation activities.

Vulnerability to real life issues

Children and youth with disabilities are particularly vulnerable to the five real life issues. For instance, students with behavioral disorders are almost twice as likely to use drugs, cigarettes and alcohol as their non-disabled peers (Elmquist, Morgan, & Bolds, 1992; Leone, Greenberg, Trickett, & Spero, 1989). A higher proportion of students with disabilities compared with their non-disabled peers come from single-parent and nontraditional households, have a family member with an alcohol or other drug problem, and have witnessed or experienced physical or sexual abuse (Borowsky & Resnick, 1998). Although youth with mental retardation use alcohol and other drugs at rates less than or similar to the general population (Westermeyer, Kemp, & Nugent, 1996), the impact of these substances may further compromise existing cognitive and motor skill deficits.

Although studies do not specifically identify the incidence of HIV/AIDS among students with disabilities, youth with special needs are at-risk for HIV infection, sexually transmitted diseases, and sexual abuse for a variety of reasons. First, they may not have the knowledge their peers have about their bodies and sexuality. Second, they are eager to please, making them more apt to acquiesce to others. Third, they may demonstrate poor judgment or impulse control and may not understand the consequences of their behavior.

Students with disabilities are particularly vulnerable to bullying and social ostracism. Many youth with mild disabilities struggle with poor social skills. Deficits in cognition impact these individuals’ ability to encode the actions and words of those around them and to judge the relevance of social information. For instance, they may not be able to read others’ facial expressions, tone of voice or mood. In addition, they may not have the knowledge of or ability to select and use behaviors that lead to socially acceptable outcomes (Goldstein & McGinnis, 1997; Gresham & Elliott, 1987). In particular, students with learning disabilities receive more peer rejection (Kuhne & Wiener, 2000; Vaughn & Haager, 1994), lower social skill ratings (Kavale & Forness, 1996) and have lower social acceptance (Ochoa & Olivarez, 1995) than students without disabilities, making them an easy target for bullying and social ostracism. Many gifted students are rejected by classmates and may learn to maintain a distance between themselves and others as a protective measure (Janos, Fung, & Robinson, 1985; Kregar, 1993). Furthermore, students with behavioral disorders engage in high rates of violent or aggressive behaviors.

Principles for design and implementation of real life issues curriculum infusion

Several principles for instruction guide the implementation of research-based prevention strategies directed towards students with exceptionality.

• Expect students with disabilities to have grossly inaccurate perceptions of peer engagement in risky behaviors. Because many of these students have cognitive deficits that interfere with the ability to attend to and to interpret social information, they may rely on what their peers or what the media convey about what is acceptable behavior. Furthermore, research indicates that children with behavioral difficulties spend increasingly more time with deviant peer groups (Cairns, Cairns, & Neckerman, 1989; Patterson, 1993). Therefore, these youngsters’ perceptions of peer engagement in harmful behaviors may be accurate, when applied to their group of friends. Educators may need to address misperception of norms in combination with increasing perceptions of personal risk and promoting pro-social norms.
  
  
• Expect students’ prior knowledge about personal risk to be far less than that of their non-disabled peers. Due to learning delays caused by their deficits, they may never have been exposed to common knowledge that other students take for granted (e.g., students with reading deficits spend less time in independent reading tasks). Recommendations include: administering informal assessments to see what students know about a given real life issue and teaching prerequisite knowledge.
  
  
• Be prepared to find alternative and supplementary materials to teach the same content offered to students without disabilities. For instance, use high interest-low reading level books, simplify oral and written information to match the ability level of the student, combine auditory information with visual depictions and offer plenty of hands-on activities.
  
  
• When students are gifted, enrichment activities and instructional strategies that promote inquiry, higher-order thinking and independent learning may be beneficial for teaching real life issues content.
  
  
• Students with disabilities may lack communication and higher order thinking skills, which are needed for learning key life skills (e.g., negotiating, decision making). Identify replacement behaviors to compensate for these deficits (e.g., teach the student to walk away or seek help versus verbally responding to a bully).
  
  
• These students need instruction in their area of disability that is highly explicit and well structured. Educators need to emphasize critical components of each lesson, speak clearly and directly to learning objectives and summarize and review information frequently.
  
  
• Be aware of the climate in the classroom. Work to nurture self-esteem and a sense of belonging. Recommendations include: establishing reciprocal peer-tutoring and cooperative learning groups, providing social praise for kindness and cooperation, and establishing consequences for undesirable behavior such as put-downs.
  
  
• Recognize that students with disabilities may learn at a slower rate than students without disabilities. Prioritize both academic and life skill instruction for that which is most functional for the student rather than expect to address the entire curriculum for a particular grade level. (e.g., teach the student basic ways to prevent HIV/AIDS vs. to explain the progression of a disease).
  
  
• Recognize that students who are gifted and/or talented may learn at a faster rate than their classmates. Teachers will want to expand the depth and breadth of instruction for these students (e.g., invite students to analyze the effects of U.S. policy on the spread of HIV/AIDS in America and other nations).
  
  
• Recognize that these students may have a higher need than students without disabilities for positive attention and support. Promoting pro-social norms is more likely when educators seek to establish authentic bonds with these youngsters.
  
  
• Recognize that parents of these students (particularly those with behavioral disorders) face many stressors (e.g., single parent, history of deviant behavior). When possible, communicate with family members frequently, particularly to report good news. When parents are unavailable, seek to connect the student with other community members willing to spend time and serve as positive role models.

Borowsky, I. W., & Resnick, M. D. (1998). Environmental stressors and emotional status of adolescents who have been in special education classes. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 152, 377-382.

Cairns, R. B., Cairns, B. D., & Neckerman, H. J. (1989). Early school dropout:
Configurations and determinants. Child Development, 60, 1437-1452.

Elmquist, D. L., Morgan, D. P., & Bolds, P. (1992). Substance abuse among adolescents with disabilities. International Journal of the Addictions, 27, 1475-1483.

Goldstein, A. P., & McGinnis, E. (1997). Skill streaming the adolescent: New strategies and perspectives for teaching pro-social skills (rev.ed.). Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Gresham, F. M., & Elliott, S. N. (1987). The relationship between adaptive behavior and social skills: Issues in definition and assessment. Journal of Special Education, 21(1), 167-181.

Janos, P.M., Fung, H., & Robinson, N. M. (1985). Perceptions of deviance and self concept within an intellectually gifted sample. Gifted Child Quarterly, 29, 78-82.

Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (1987). The far side of heterogeneity: A critical analysis of empirical subtyping research in learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 374-382.

Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S. R. (1996). Social skill deficits and learning disabilities: A meta analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 226-237.

Kreger Silverman, L. (1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver, CO: Love Publishing Company.

Kuhne, M., & Wiener, J. (2000). Stability of social status of children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 23, 64-75.

Leone, P.E., Greenberg, J. M., Trickett, E. J., & Spero, E. (1989). A study of the use of cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana by students identified as “seriously emotionally disturbed.” Counterpoint, 9, 6-7.

Nelson, J. R., Benner, G. J., & Rogers, D. L. (2003). An investigation of the characteristics of k-12 students with comorbid emotional disturbance and significant language deficits served in public school settings. Behavioral Disorders, 29, 25-33.

Ochoa, S. H., & Olivarez, A., Jr. (1995). A meta-analysis of peer rating sociometric studies of pupils with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 29, 1-19.

Patterson, G. R. (1993). Orderly change in a stable world: The antisocial trait as a chimera. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 911-919.

Rinaldi, C. (2003). Language competence and social behavior of students with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 29, 34-42.

Vaughn, S., & Haager, D. (1994). Social competence as a multifaceted construct: How do students with learning disabilities fare? Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 253-266.

Westermeyer, J., Kemp, K., & Nugent, S. (1996). Substance disorder among persons with mild mental retardation: A comparative study. American Journal on Addictions, 5, 23-31.

Back to Top