MIRIAM C. NAGEL Avo" High Schwi Avon. CT 06001
Teaching Handicapped Students in a Litigious Society Jack A. Gerlovlch Science Education State of Iowa Dttpt. of Public lnsbuction Grimes State Office Building DBSMoines, IA 50319
Contemporary U.S. society is among the most litigious (prone t o settling disputes in court) in world history. I t seems that today the only way t o settle a dispute or accident involving personal injury is to litigate i t in court. Within the context of such a society, is i t reasonable and prudent to include handicapped students in the normal laboratory exercises of a chemistry laboratory? A teacher is negligent and therefore liable for damages only if it can he proven that the teacher has failed to take "reasonable care" or has acted in an illegal manner? If the standard of care has not been specifically established by statute, the actions or inactions of the teacher would be assessed against what a hypothetical reasonable and prudent person would have done under the same circumstances. In addition, it must be decided if the teacher could have, or should, have reasonably foreseen a potential problem and taken necessary measures to prevent it. In making the determination of what constitutes negligent behavior, the courts usually pose four questions: 1)Did the teacher owe a duty of care to protect another? 2) Did the teacher fail to exercise that care? 3) Was there an accident in which a person was injured? 4) Was the failure to exercise care the cause of the injury? If i t can he shown that failure to exercise the duty of care was the direct cause of the injury, then the defendent may he Teachers should know whether their state supports contributory negligence or comparative negligence as defense in a law suit. This is especially critical when dealing with handicapped students. A minority of the states are under the contributory negligence clause, which hasically states that a student has, by disobeying rules, instructions, or other personal actions, contributed t o his or her own injury. If i t can he shown that the cause of injury was a t least partially the fault of the student, there would he no grounds for alleging negligence against the teacher. Contributory negligence is generally an all-or-nothing situation. The majority of states currently support comparatiue negligence as a defense. Under this clause, a percentage of blame is assigned t o each party (teacher and student). Negligence and any recovery for damages are hased upon the percentage of fault of each person involved in the accident. Public Law 94-142 and Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act mandated programming for handicapped students in the least restrictive environment possible. The inclusion of handicapped students in science lahoratory courses increases the concern for their safety since they often cannot see or hear a potentially dangerous situation developing. In addition, many handicapped students cannot react rapidly enough t o protect themselves in an emergency. Some classes with handicapped students may require additional s u p e ~ s i o n .
Although there are certainly some unique problems in inteeratine h a n d i c a ~ ~ students ed into the twical chemistry .laborator; situation, there are some common sense approaches that have proven helpful. Bybee3 suggests that teachers:
-
---~ ~
~~
&.
Secure all available background information available about the student. Educate themselves through literature and i n t e ~ e w swith parents and students concerning the limitations imposed by the handicap. Determine any special equipment needs of the student. Identify physical and psychological harriers to the student. Pair the handicapped student with a nonhandicapped class member who would like to help. Use consistem grading and disri~linestandards for handicapped and nanhandicnpped students. Educate other students concerning the handicap. Not underestimate the capabilitiesof the handicapped; however, realize that some activities may have to he modified for safety's sake. Not patronize handicapped students;they recognize such hehavior immediately and perform to those levels of expectation.
. .
In addition to these general guidelines i t may help t o discuss some suggestions for specific handicaps. The hearing impaired depend extensively on visual images; they should he .-seated where there are no obstructions to their view. Work with the student to identify the best way to communicate. Develon visual cues to such auditory emergency signals as fire alaris, smoke detectors, etc. students depend extensiveBv contrast uisually . impaired . ly upon hearing. They should he seated wh& auditory signals and instructions are hest heard. Rearrange the room to remove physical harriers and then acquaint the handicapped student with it. Do not rearrange furniture or equipment again without apprising him or her. Allow the student to learn through tactile senses as much as possible. As facial expressions are meaningless, use the student's name and touching often to communicate. For the physically handicapped (includes students in wheelchairs, on crutches, arms in slings, etc.) it is essential to remove as manv architectural barriers as possible. Become -~ familiar with safe hut effective devices which accommodate the student's handicap. For instance, wheelchairs need 30in. clearance t o fit under a counter and a 36-in. width to pass between obstructions. In addition, there must be sufficient depth for the student to place his or her legs under the counter without encountering uninsulated hot water pipes, etc. The workspace should be a t least 18 in. deep and 30 in. wide. If possible, the height of the work surface should he adjusted to a level appropriate for safe handling of lab equipment. A portable lab table can sometimes he used for this ~
'
Brown, B. W.; Brown, W. R. "Science Teaching and the Law"; Natl. Science Teachers' Assn.: Washington. 1969. Hudgins, H. C., Jr. In "Yearbook of School Law"; Piele, P. K.. Ed.; Natl. Organization of Legal Problems in Educ.: Topeka, KS, 1976. Bybee, R. Sci. Teach. 1979, (Oct.), 23. Volume 63
Number 8
August 1986
717
purpose. But, if lab activities conducted by the wheelchairbound student will be at chest or face level, extra care must be taken through the use of face shields and body-leneth aprons to protect the faceand body from splashes and spfils. Care must be taken to anticipate emergency cleanup if the standard facilities are bevond reach. Since many speech and language impaired students will mimic what they hear, the teacher should be sure that his or her speech is clear and articulate. Listen carefully for speech problems and attempt to help the student realize the roblem and correct it. For the learning disabled and mentally retarded, teachers should individualize activities contoured toward the student's strength. Use concrete level and sensory motor activities that are within the student's limits of frustration. Help students develop a good self esteem by teaching to their most refined sensory skills. For the emotionally disturbed student make rules clear and reasonable and provide realistic consequences if they
718 .
Journal of Chemical Education
are broken. Never use physical punishment. Resolve problems by talking and reasoning. It is immediatelv obvious that severelv handicanned . students will require kpecial attention, bey&d the experience level of the tvpical chemistrv teacher as well as the latitude of the facilities and budget of the average school. These students would best be taught in special education settin~s. If the teacher cannot redice thelevel of risk to an acceptable point, due to stringent laws, equipment or knowledge limitations,or the nature of the student's handicap, he or she has a responsibility to modify the activity, secure the necessary equipment, improve his or her knowledge level, andlor modify or eliminate the activity or the student from the p~ogram.~
.
Manv ideas for adaDtlno Me laboratorv for handlcaod students were given in the specii is&e of THIS J W ~ N A L(March ibs 1) devoted to the subject of teaching the handicapped student.
