Search

Accessible Summary Pupils with autism are often physically handled in schools without teachers realising that this can be distressing for them., Many teachers do not know about the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities., Teachers need support with developing their understanding of how pupils experience being handled., It is important that the rights of disabled pupils are recognised and protected., Summary 'Positive handling' has become a popular intervention within education and other services in England in the management of behaviours that challenge. This paper uses a vignette of an observation of the handling of children with autism as a starting point for consideration of whether this practice can ever really be experienced as positive or whether it is often little more than a mechanism of control that disregards the rights of disabled children and young people. All schools are mandated under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to protect the rights of disabled pupils, but, to date, there has been very little engagement by teachers with this agenda. This paper identifies some of the rights of pupils that are negated through current practice and evaluates what support Prouty's principles of pre-therapy from the field of counselling might offer teachers with developing a rights based agenda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many professionals and carers who support people with the label of autism look to lecturers and ‘trainers’ in autism to provide the answers on how to ‘manage’ the ‘condition’. This article describes how two lecturers in autism respond to this challenge by encouraging their students to focus on questions rather than answers. It is argued here that it is through the process of reflective thinking that people will find the most appropriate solutions to the issues that concern them. The article identifies some of the key questions that can support the reflective process and illustrates the applicability of these, beyond the limitations of labels, to every relationship between educator and learner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is nearly 30 years since Mary Warnock's Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People introduced the phrase ‘special educational needs’ into the UK education system. In this article, Katherine Runswick-Cole, Research Associate at Manchester Metropolitan University, and Nick Hodge, Principal Lecturer in Research Development at Sheffield Hallam University, argue for the abandonment of the ‘special needs’ discourse, claiming that it has, in fact, led to exclusionary practices within education. Building on the work of early years educators in Reggio Emilia schools in Northern Italy, the authors advocate for the adoption of the phrase ‘educational rights’ and suggest that the positive impact of such a linguistic turn would be significant for the lives of young people currently described as having ‘special educational needs’ and for children's rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]