Luria was born in Kazan, a regional center east of Moscow, to Jewish parents. He studied at Kazan State University (graduated in 1921), Kharkov Medical Institute and 1st Moscow Medical Institute

“Alexander Luria”

Luria was born in Kazan, a regional center east of Moscow, to Jewish parents. He studied at Kazan State University (graduated in 1921), Kharkov Medical Institute and 1st Moscow Medical Institute (graduated in 1937). He was appointed Professor (1944), Doctor of Pedagogical (1937) and Medical Sciences (1943). Throughout his career Luria worked in a wide range of scientific fields at such institutions as the Academy of Communist Education (1920-30s), Experimental Defectological Institute (1920-30s, 1950-60s, both in Moscow), Ukrainian Psychoneurological Academy (Kharkov, early 1930s), All-Union Institute of Experimental Medicine, Burdenko Institute of Neurosurgery (late 1930s), and other institutions. In the late 1930s, Luria went to medical school. Following the war, Luria continued his work in Moscow's Institute of Psychology. For a period of time, he was removed from the Institute of Psychology, mainly as a result of a flare-up of anti-Semitism and shifted to research on mentally retarded children at the Defectological Institute in the 1950s. Additionally, from 1945 on Luria worked at the Moscow State University and was instrumental in the foundation of the Faculty of Psychology at the Moscow State University, where he later headed the Departments of Patho- and Neuropsychology.

While a student in Kazan, he established the Kazan Psychoanalytic Association and exchanged letters with Sigmund Freud.

In 1923, his work with reaction times related to thought processes earned him a position at the Institute of Psychology in Moscow. There, he developed the "combined motor method," which helped diagnose individuals' thought processes, creating the first ever lie-detector device. This research was published in the US in 1932 (published in Russian for the first time only in 2002).

In 1924, Luria met Lev Vygotsky, who would influence him greatly. Along with Alexei Leont'ev, these three psychologists launched a project of developing a psychology of a radically new kind. This approach fused "cultural," "historical," and "instrumental" psychology and is most commonly referred to presently as cultural-historical psychology. It emphasizes the mediatory role of culture, particularly language, in the development of higher mental functions in ontogeny and phylogenesis.

Luria's work continued in the 1930s with his psychological expeditions to Central Asia. Under the supervision of Vygotsky, Luria investigated various psychological changes (including perception, problem solving, and memory) that take place as a result of cultural development of undereducated minorities. In this regard he has been credited with a major contribution to the study of oral communication. Later, he studied identical and fraternal twins in large residential schools to determine the interplay of various factors of cultural and genetic human development. In his early neuropsychological work in the end of 1930s as well as throughout his postwar academic life he focused on the study of aphasia, focusing on the relation between language, thought, and cortical functions, particularly on the development of compensatory functions for aphasia.

During World War II Luria led a research team at an army hospital looking for ways to compensate psychological dysfunctions in patients with brain lesions. His work resulted in creating the field of Neuropsychology. His two main case studies, both published a few years before his death, described S. Shereshevskii, a Russian journalist with a seemingly unlimited memory (1968), in part due to his fivefold synesthesia. This case was presented in a book The Mind of a Mnemonist. Luria's other most well-known book is The Man with a Shattered World, a penetrating account of Zasetsky, a man who suffered a traumatic brain injury (1972).

Про инклюзию мы перевели вот до этого места

Writers have different ideas about exactly what full inclusion means. However, most definitions contain the following key elements:

· All students with disabilities—regardless of the types or severities of disabilities— attend only classes in general education. In other words, there are no separate spe­cial education classes.

· All students with disabilities attend their neighborhood schools (i.e., the ones they would go to if they had no disabilities).

· General education, not special education, assumes primary responsibility for stu­dents with disabilities.

Some advocates of full inclusion propose the total elimination of special education. Others hold that professionals such as special teachers are still needed but that their main duties should be carried out in general education classrooms.

Arguments Favoring Full Inclusion. Those who advocate full inclusion base their po­sition on at least the following four premises:

1. Labeling people is harmful.

2. Separate special education has been ineffective.

3. People with disabilities should be viewed as a minority group. People with disabilities have experienced dis­crimination on the basis of their disability and therefore can be considered an oppressed minority group.

4. Ethics are more important than empirical evidence. The rationale for full inclusion is based on presumptive moral values, not research data.

Arguments Against Full Inclusion. The notion of full inclusion has met with consid­erable resistance. At least six arguments against full inclusion have been offered:

1. General educators, special educators, and parents are largely satisfied with and see the continuing need for the continuum of alternative placements.

2. General educators are unwilling and/or unable to cope with all students with dis­abilities.

3. Justifying full inclusion by asserting that people with disabilities are a minority is flawed.

4. Full-inclusion proponents' unwillingness to consider empirical evidence is pro­fessionally irresponsible. Full inclusion ignores the considerable evidence that children and adults need affiliation, for at least some of the time, with others like themselves

5. The available empirical evidence does not support full inclusion. There are few rigorous studies of full in­clusion, but those that are available suggest that full inclusion has not led to social or aca­demic benefits for all students.

6. In the absence of data to support one service delivery model, special educators must preserve the continuum of placements.

Whether or not one supports the concept of full inclusion, the fact is that most educators are in favor of some degree of integration of students with disabilities with nondisabled stu­dents. For participation in general education classrooms to be successful, special educators, general educators, and other professionals must provide some form of support for the stu­dent. There are generally five ways in which teachers help students with disabilities to par­ticipate in the general education classroom:

1. Pre-referral teams and response to intervention models. Pre-referral teams (PRTs) are groups of professionals (e.g., special education teachers, counselors, administrators, psychologists) who work with general education teachers to help identify alternative educational strategies for students who are struggling in the class­room before a referral for special education evaluation is made.

2. Collaborative consultation.

3. Cooperative teaching and other team arrangements.

4. Curricula and instructional strategies.

5. Accommodations and adaptations.

Students with disabilities who are not included are typically either mainstreamed or segregated. A mainstreamed student attends some general education classes, typically for less than half the day, and often for less academically rigorous classes. For example, a young student with significant intellectual disabilities might be mainstreamed for physical education classes, art classes and storybook time, but spend reading and mathematics classes with other students that have similar disabilities. A segregated student attends no classes with non-disabled students. He or she might attend a special school that only enrolls other students with disabilities, or might be placed in a dedicated, self-contained classroom in a school that also enrolls general education students. Some students may be confined to a hospital due to a medical condition and are thus eligible for tutoring services provided by a school district. Less common alternatives include homeschooling and, particularly in developing countries, exclusion from education.

II. 1. Answer the questions:

1) What are the trends and issues integrating people with disabilities into the larger society?

2) What are the trends and issues integrating students with exceptionalities into schools?

3) What is your opinion about full inclusion?

2. Say whether the following statements are true or false:

1) Segregation of anу kind is morally wrong; inclusion is morally right.

2) The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act was enacted in 1990 and reauthorized in 1997 and 2004. This federal law requires that to receive funds under the act, every school system in the nation must provide a free, appropriate public education for every child between the ages of three and twenty-one, regardless of how or how seriously he or she may be disabled.

3) Nondisabled students benefit by learning to know children with disabilities; they become more sensitive to people with disabilities.

4) A key goal for individuals with disabilities is learning skills that allow them self-determination

5) Planning for a person's self-determination; planning activi­ties and services based on a person's dreams, aspirations, interests, preferences, strengths, and capacities.

6) The child needs to be around other children with similar disabilities; he or she fits in better, feels less stigmatized or different, and has more real friends in a special setting.

7) The child does not get the needed teacher attention or ser­vices in general education.

8) The overall goal of inclusive education is to ensure that school is a place where all children participate and are treated equally.

9) An inclusive curriculum addresses the child’s cognitive, emotional and creative development.

10) Inclusion has two sub-types: the first is sometimes called regular inclusion or partial inclusion, and the other is full inclusion.

Перевод этого отрывка должен точно быть!!!!!!!!

Дата добавления: 2015-11-04