So, I read the article in post 4 that gives the teacher's side of the story, and I have to say that I'm still of the opinion she should be canned. Learning-disabled or not, publicly humiliating a child is not an appropriate response to any disruption, regardless. If the boy was disruptive, there are far more apropriate ways to handle such situations.
If the boy has an actual neurological problem, then is a class like this the best place for him? Should he not have special teaching of some sort?
It's extremely important for autistic spectrum children to be able to interact with their peers, and not isolated in "special needs". That's part of the "special teaching" necessary for autistic spectrum disorders. They have a difficult time with social cues, and it takes far longer for them to learn how to socialize well with others. Institutionalizing them, or shutting them away in a "retard ghetto" is not the answer.
And is this teacher expected to be able to decide whether he has such problems, or whether he is just badly behaved and disruptive?
The school had already been informed that the child was being tested for Aspergers.
In any case, there are only three reasons that a child would be badly behaved and disruptive in the classroom: bad parenting, bad teaching, an actual neurological disorder. The last has been medically diagnosed. The first may or may not be accurate; but the second has been amply demonstrated by this incident. Even if it's just a bad parenting issue, humiliating a child who already has a lot of trouble at home isn't what I'd call reasonable or proper either.
I don't know how common autism actually is, but I do seem to see a tendency- especially in the US- to assume that badly behaved kids have a problem, whereas it may be more valid to assume that they ARE a problem.
A teacher has a class to handle. If one child disrupts the class, whether because he is mentally ill or just badly behaved, what recourse DOES that teacher have to enable him/her to do his duty for the rest of the class?
This is a problem with our whole school system structure. But regardless, there were far better ways to deal with this situation than the one she chose.
This "vote" seems an odd way to try to get across to the kid that he was upsetting his classmates, but in my day, the kid would have been physically punished, or expelled. (At least if he was a little older- kindergartens were rare when I was a kid).
Maybe the teacher's approach makes more sense than it might seem.
We seem quick to blame the teacher, not the child, or the child's parents. Perhaps the teacher needs more support here? She's damned if she disciplines the kid, damned if she lets the other kids do it and damned if she lets him spoil the class. She can't win.
In what way could publically humiliating a child by having him get up in front of a classroom and listen as every other child in class tells him what's wrong with him possibly be a valid disciplinary act? You don't do that to normal kids, let alone disabled ones.