Intellectual Disability

Explaining on, Henley et al (2009. p.32-34) state that this classification process assumes that assigning a student a categorical name implies knowledge about the characteristics of the student’s learning problem. This means that the essential reason for labeling students is to help educators in quickly or easily identifying the students by their disability level so that the needed support can be given to them outright. Because of this, there are traditional labels such as mild, moderate and severe intellectual disability. The question that has however revolved around most circles of educational literature is whether or not labeling has lived to its purpose and whether or not labeling is still relevant today. Foreman (2009) and Thompson et al (2009) approach the subject from their own perspectives. Without any doubt the two writers under review through a lot of point for the practice of labeling of students with a disability. In the case of Thompson et al (2009) for instance, the writers revisit the fact that for the sake of successful classification or labeling to take place, educators have always been very particular with measurement exercises. Foreman (2009) also mentions that labeling or classification leads to support of the enhancement. Clearly if for the sake of labeling educators will be very serious with academic measurement exercises, it means that there will be a true reflection of what each and every student represents and what each and every student made up of so that eventual placement for educational and professional courses will be effective. Again, once students with a mental disability are labeled, if helps in dishing out the most precise and prescribed support for their educational needs. Indeed there is a traditional saying that a drug used to treat boils cannot be used to treat stomach ache. This is to mean that treatment that is needed by a student with a certain level or degree of mental disability will not be appropriate for a student with a different degree of mental disability. From this perspective, both groups of writers admit that labeling is useful.