Even then it should be used only for compelling reasons necessary to meet the child’s needs:
I have nothing against a student leaving the classroom for a short period of time to meet an individual need. And that goes right through from the multiply handicapped to the most gifted students in our schoola. Everybody has individual needs, and if we can meet them by withdrawing the child from class, or giving them an alternative from time to time, then there is nothing wrong with that. However, that’s only the case if it doesn’t interfere with the child’s self-esteem. I think that pull-out should be done cautiously and as little as is necessary.
Individualized instruction in class is the alternative to the pull-out approach. This may be done by the teacher, the teacher’s aide, or by the M&R teacher coming into the class:
At present, we haven’t had to use pull-out very much. But in essence, our teacher’s aides have been ping into the class and providing individual instruction. [They] don’t work with the child in a seperate group, but within the classroom. And I think it should happen in the classroom, because then the teacher realises what’s happening with the child and can have some input.
The M&R teachers interviewed disagreed with the concept of out-of-class instruction as a way of making students “ready” for regular classroom instruction:
Teachers talk about readiness, which I think is a myth. You don’t get ready to learn something. You can advance children’s interest, by trying to get them involved, but you don’t get somebody ready for something.
