“There is no pity or tragedy in disability”

By far the greatest problems reported globally by experts and by persons with disabilities are prejudice, social isolation and discrimination in society. Soha Tabbal discusses the negative labeling effects on the learning of children with disabilities in mainstream schools. Language is powerful and our choice of words can either continue social exclusion and marginalization or promote inclusion, rights and full participation to society. Whilst prejudice towards persons with a disability remains well rooted in some regions, notably rural areas, it is more dangerous to be used against children with disability as it prevents them from enjoying their rights to equal access to education and consequently have equal opportunities in life during adulthood

Practices throughout history have confirmed that continuous change has been occurring in educational circles regarding the labels used to describe children with disabilities. Terms used to label children with intellectual disabilities range from “idiot” to “feeble-minded” to ”retardate” to “mentally-disabled”. The labeling has finally settled to a more generic name that is now more commonly used, “intellectual disability”. This is, by far, the biggest proof that educators realize the importance of the effects of these labels on the provision of appropriate educational services to children with disabilities in mainstream schools.

A person is considered as someone with disability when he/she experiences an incident that makes him/her feel the presence of that handicap or disability; because of this, labels must not be randomly used to describe a person. For instance, a person with visual impairment will feel his/her disability if he/she takes a road he/she is unfamiliar with; in the same way, he/she can be a guide to his/her sighted family members when the electricity goes off in a home he/she shares with them.

Legalists anticipate that this new trend of abolishing labels and promoting equality in dignity and rights on the basis of one’s capacity adopted by international human rights organizations will increase opportunities for a better life, dignity of and equal rights to everyone1.

Key terms:
1. Labeling – designates a group of persons who share similar quality or qualities with a single description. For example, “children with intellectual disabilities”, “slow learners”, “children with learning disabilities”.

2. Classification – categorizing persons or children who share the same label into smaller groupings with more similar or exact qualities: children with intellectual disabilities are broken down into children with “mild, moderate, severe and very severe intellectual disabilities”.

3. Stigma – a negative mark a person or child is given, which often stays with him/her for the rest of his/her life2

Early detection and diagnosis lessens the exchange or misuse of labels
More often than not, labels indicate that a person’s case is permanent and the disorder he/she suffers from is persistent. However, this assertion is rejected by early intervention trends as a lot of disorders tend to stabilize and improve when detected, diagnosed and introduced to intervention early, contributing to the overall progress of the child’s developmental skills3. These trends require the use of the terms, “developmentally delayed children” and “children at risk” to describe targeted categories of early intervention programs, which lessens the child’s developmental problems, lowers the risk of emergence of secondary disabilities, and ensures he/ she receives educational services along with his/her peers4.

Early intervention is considered the first in a series of comprehensive evaluation phases, which developed countries make sure conform to the law. The special education guide issued by the National Dissemination Center for Children and Youths with Disabilities (NICHCY) in the United States that is based on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) enumerates the steps to a child receiving suitable educational services in mainstream schools: 1) detecting the problem, 2) diagnosing it, 3) evaluation, 4) establishing the child’s capacity in educational programs and finally, 5) submitting it for labeling and linking results to individual educational programs5.

Key negative effects of labeling on the provision of educational services
The perceptions of students and teachers towards children with disabilities are often influenced by the prevalent culture, religion, level of government support, and economic situation. Agbenyega6 cites Chinze (2000) who states that comprehensive inclusion plays an important role in facilitating the learning of children with all kinds of disabilities and if labels are reduced, the individual needs of students are better determined met. Within the framework of mainstream education, there are many possible negative effects of labeling, which are presented as follows:
1. Labeling and categorization impedes the acceptance of both teachers and students of pupils with disabilities in their classes.
2. The Rosenthal Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: some teachers lower their expectations of their students’ success and some pupils believe they are justified in showing an unwillingness to learn7.
3. With the exception of some students from the mainstream classes for personal considerations, some labels are used inaccurately and unfairly8.
4. Labeling and categorization likewise influence students’ acceptance of the child with disability in a mainstream school and the level of participation in mainstream school activities9. Results of numerous studies have shown the refusal of children in mainstream schools to play or interact with children with disabilities; and when asked the names of children they preferred not to play with, names often mentioned were their classmates with disabilities10.
5. A label often marks the child for the rest of his/her life, affecting his/her concept of his/her character in a negative manner, making him/her feel less accepted among his/her peers in class11.

In summary, teaching students without exception or labeling is an important trend in guiding mainstream school educators and students to focus on what the student has, to think of the common human factors they share with persons with disabilities and their abilities before thinking of their disabilities.

“There is no pity or tragedy in disability”

By far the greatest problems reported globally by experts and by persons with disabilities are prejudice, social isolation and discrimination in society. Soha Tabbal discusses the negative labeling effects on the learning of children with disabilities in mainstream schools. Language is powerful and our choice of words can either continue social exclusion and marginalization or promote inclusion, rights and full participation to society. Whilst prejudice towards persons with a disability remains well rooted in some regions, notably rural areas, it is more dangerous to be used against children with disability as it prevents them from enjoying their rights to equal access to education and consequently have equal opportunities in life during adulthood

Practices throughout history have confirmed that continuous change has been occurring in educational circles regarding the labels used to describe children with disabilities. Terms used to label children with intellectual disabilities range from “idiot” to “feeble-minded” to ”retardate” to “mentally-disabled”. The labeling has finally settled to a more generic name that is now more commonly used, “intellectual disability”. This is, by far, the biggest proof that educators realize the importance of the effects of these labels on the provision of appropriate educational services to children with disabilities in mainstream schools.

A person is considered as someone with disability when he/she experiences an incident that makes him/her feel the presence of that handicap or disability; because of this, labels must not be randomly used to describe a person. For instance, a person with visual impairment will feel his/her disability if he/she takes a road he/she is unfamiliar with; in the same way, he/she can be a guide to his/her sighted family members when the electricity goes off in a home he/she shares with them.

Legalists anticipate that this new trend of abolishing labels and promoting equality in dignity and rights on the basis of one’s capacity adopted by international human rights organizations will increase opportunities for a better life, dignity of and equal rights to everyone1.

Key terms:
1. Labeling – designates a group of persons who share similar quality or qualities with a single description. For example, “children with intellectual disabilities”, “slow learners”, “children with learning disabilities”.

2. Classification – categorizing persons or children who share the same label into smaller groupings with more similar or exact qualities: children with intellectual disabilities are broken down into children with “mild, moderate, severe and very severe intellectual disabilities”.

3. Stigma – a negative mark a person or child is given, which often stays with him/her for the rest of his/her life2

Early detection and diagnosis lessens the exchange or misuse of labels
More often than not, labels indicate that a person’s case is permanent and the disorder he/she suffers from is persistent. However, this assertion is rejected by early intervention trends as a lot of disorders tend to stabilize and improve when detected, diagnosed and introduced to intervention early, contributing to the overall progress of the child’s developmental skills3. These trends require the use of the terms, “developmentally delayed children” and “children at risk” to describe targeted categories of early intervention programs, which lessens the child’s developmental problems, lowers the risk of emergence of secondary disabilities, and ensures he/ she receives educational services along with his/her peers4.

Early intervention is considered the first in a series of comprehensive evaluation phases, which developed countries make sure conform to the law. The special education guide issued by the National Dissemination Center for Children and Youths with Disabilities (NICHCY) in the United States that is based on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) enumerates the steps to a child receiving suitable educational services in mainstream schools: 1) detecting the problem, 2) diagnosing it, 3) evaluation, 4) establishing the child’s capacity in educational programs and finally, 5) submitting it for labeling and linking results to individual educational programs5.

Key negative effects of labeling on the provision of educational services
The perceptions of students and teachers towards children with disabilities are often influenced by the prevalent culture, religion, level of government support, and economic situation. Agbenyega6 cites Chinze (2000) who states that comprehensive inclusion plays an important role in facilitating the learning of children with all kinds of disabilities and if labels are reduced, the individual needs of students are better determined met. Within the framework of mainstream education, there are many possible negative effects of labeling, which are presented as follows:
1. Labeling and categorization impedes the acceptance of both teachers and students of pupils with disabilities in their classes.
2. The Rosenthal Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: some teachers lower their expectations of their students’ success and some pupils believe they are justified in showing an unwillingness to learn7.
3. With the exception of some students from the mainstream classes for personal considerations, some labels are used inaccurately and unfairly8.
4. Labeling and categorization likewise influence students’ acceptance of the child with disability in a mainstream school and the level of participation in mainstream school activities9. Results of numerous studies have shown the refusal of children in mainstream schools to play or interact with children with disabilities; and when asked the names of children they preferred not to play with, names often mentioned were their classmates with disabilities10.
5. A label often marks the child for the rest of his/her life, affecting his/her concept of his/her character in a negative manner, making him/her feel less accepted among his/her peers in class11.

In summary, teaching students without exception or labeling is an important trend in guiding mainstream school educators and students to focus on what the student has, to think of the common human factors they share with persons with disabilities and their abilities before thinking of their disabilities.