Search results

This chapter sought to answer the following questions: (a) what does special education means for students with intellectual disability?, (b) what is being done, and (c) how do we maintain tradition? The answers, while complicated, suggest special education for students with intellectual disability historically and currently involves attention to what, how, and where, with the how being the key elements of special education for students with intellectual disability. This chapter discussed the what, how, and where for students with intellectual disability in a historical and current framework while also providing evidence-based practices for students with intellectual disability to implement to maintain the tradition of high-quality services.

Intrinsic values to the field of special education include advocacy, inclusivity, individuality, and empiricism. From early days of providing custodial care in segregated settings, special education has evolved into a program that seeks to educate students with a wide range of learning needs in inclusive settings and identify a robust research base that informs its policies and practices. Important concepts such as inclusion and continuum of services have not only been valuable in conceptualizing and in providing intervention for students with disabilities but have also been valuable in advancing the field. Research in special education and students with disabilities has been instrumental in moving the field forward. In the future, special education will continue to be valuable in supporting students whose learning and survival needs deviate from the norm in meaningful ways by delivering responsive evidence-based instruction.

Family–school partnerships are an essential component of the special education process for children with disabilities. Notably, recent legislative reauthorizations of IDEA (2004) have focused on increasing parent involvement. For many parents, participation occurs primarily through the individualized education program (IEP) meetings. Parent involvement often includes parent advocating for their children. However, many parents face barriers when advocating to obtain appropriate special education services for their children with disabilities. Culturally and linguistically diverse families face greater systemic barriers (e.g., language and cultural differences) to access services for their own children with disabilities. School professionals can foster opportunities to help families be active members of the IEP process. For example, school professionals should connect families with resources to learn about their special education rights. Specifically, school personnel can encourage families to reach out to their local Parent Training and Information (PTI) Center to be educated and empowered to advocate for services. In addition, parents can be encouraged to attend parent advocacy programs to help increase knowledge, advocacy, and empowerment to access and advocate for services for their own children. Advancing the values of working with parents of students with special education needs is discussed.

What does special education mean for general education teachers of students with disabilities? In this chapter, we share our approach to advancing values in the classroom placement of special education students in the general education setting. We will take the reader on a journey through time with “Jessie,” a special education student, as we examine the historical exclusion of students with disabilities to their inclusion in general education schools, environments and finally, general education classrooms. In doing so, we will examine the evolution of the general education teacher's role and how the historical perspective impacts current practices. Then, we will elucidate the benefits of inclusion, not only for the special education student but for the nondisabled peers as well. We will recommend values that should be maintained and practices that should be examined. This chapter will conclude with a connection between the values and recommendations of best practices for inclusive instruction.

This study aims to determine the prevalence and predictors of postpartum depression (PPD) among nursing mothers in Nsukka, Nigeria.

This study was a descriptive cross-sectional survey among nursing mothers in three hospitals in Nsukka, Nigeria. Data was collected using a self-administered Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS) and sociodemographic form. The data obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square test and binary logistic regression.

A total of 270 nursing mothers participated in this survey, giving a response rate of 94.4%. The prevalence of PPD among the study group was 20.0%. However, women who did not have complications during childbirth were about two times (AOR = 0.417, 95% CI = 0.204, 0.852, P = 0.016) less likely to develop symptoms of PPD than women who experienced birth complications. In addition, women who had poor relationships with their partners have approximately seven times (AOR = 6.994, 95% CI = 1.110, 44.059, P = 0.038) higher odds of developing PPD compared with those women who had excellent relationships with their partners.

The sample size was small, hence, might limit the generalizability of its findings beyond the study group. Health-care practitioners should provide appropriate interventions to women at a higher risk of developing PPD on the need to maintain a healthy and supportive relationship with their partners.

This study provides unique insight into PPD among nursing mothers and its determinants from a different regional, socioeconomic, societal expectations, social support system, access to health care and cultural context.