I guess I would start by asking whether adapting the mainstream curriculum is a form of a specialized curriculum. The US law PL 94-142 seems to indicate that where there is a "mainstream" or common curriculum within a district that is worth learning, it is thus worth learning for all students, regardless of ability. But you seem to be wondering whether there should be a curriculum that is different and not adapted, something wholly unique. I guess I would have to hear more and whether it would be a change of law. This would be a fascinating conversation with special educators as to whether they feel PL 94-142 is accomplishing what it needs to accomplish or should be accomplishing. Annabelle, if a special and certain curriculum would you imagine a change of law in the US?

In view of my personal experience; students without special needs voice their concern about the curriculum that it should be adapted according to different learners' needs, and cognitive abilities; then why not for special people!.

For me national curriculum, if it is uniform for all; its OK, but it should be flexible enough to accommodate diverse types of learners' needs.

It is necessary that they should follow the standard national curricula to remain a part of the student community . A separate curriculum would destroy their self esteem as they would feel marginalized. However, I agree with Nazia that flexibility should be practiced with approvals from those in authority.

Es de considerar que los currículos deberían ser contextualizados independiente de que sean para estudiantes con necesidades especiales, así mismo como lo dice Nazia Asad ser flexibles. Un currículo basado en el contexto permite aproximarse a aprendizajes significativos y a desarrollar capacidades para responder a lo propio de este mismo contexto, se trata así de pensarsen en función de las necesidades de la sociedad. Creo que es de considerar que "la educación no cambia el mundo, cambia a las personas que van a cambiar el mundo" (Paulo Freire), en ese sentido, este currículo debería orientarse a transformar y fortalecer a las personas como sujetos responsables de y para una sociedad, las necesidades especiales no deben ser un limitante, sino una oportunidad.

Thank you Andrea and other respondents, in general I agree. Here is Andrea's google translation (sorry, not a Spanish speaker!) "It is to consider that the curricula should be contextualized regardless of whether they are for students with special needs, as Nazia Asad says to be flexible. A curriculum based on the context allows to approach significant learning and to develop capacities to respond to the own of this same context, this is how to think according to the needs of society. I think it is to consider that "education does not change the world, it changes the people who are going to change the world" (Paulo Freire), in this sense, this curriculum should aim to transform and strengthen people as responsible subjects of and for a society, special needs should not be a limitation, but an opportunity. "

Thanks for your response Nicholas J. Shudak. I am not familiar with the system in the USA, but your response does raise some very interesting issues to consider. I am in Australia, and working in a Pacific Island location. The background to my question is that as a volunteer, I have been invited to write a 'special curriculum' to use at the only school for kids with disabilities - I am trying to convince them that we should work with the National Curriculum but they are not really familiar with modifying curricula to meet students' needs and abilities. As per other respondents to the question, I think any curriculum needs to be flexible enough to adapt to meet student needs but this method of adaptation is a skill that also needs developing - that is, teachers need to be guided, trained and supported for this to be effective. Laws and Ministry approval are also of concern when adaptation and 'special learning needs' are hardly considered by the policy/lawmakers. So maybe it is this training/mentoring/advocating that is more important than the curriculum itself?

Well, you can adapt the test to the student, but then the test is not the same for anybody and therefore loses the validation "national test". If you want to check the knowledge of all students in the same year, course and educational level nationwide, you need to make the test manageable for all of the students.

So this is definitely the way to go, and I learned so much from my colleagues with those skills. Here in Sweden, it is part of the national curriculum to adapt the national tests to students with (diagnosed) special needs such as ADHD, dyslexia and such. We have a special needs teacher at school that helps us regular teachers with adapting the national tests to the needs of the students, so they can pass them as well.

And yes, I agree with you, the training for both teachers and students needs to improve in order to provide the appropriate tools for our students. Make sure you get this kind of help and you will see a dramatic change in the success rate of your students.

A special curriculum for learners with disabilities would be unsuitable as each disability needs a different approach and individual intervention strategies. For example , a student with low IQ would need a different approach in comparison to a dyslexic student.

While I agree with Sunayana, the problem of teaching these students something different is that they are going to have to operate in a world where most students graduated with a common core of knowledge as pointed out by Miryam. Giving those students that are intellectually capable of absorbing a standard curriculum anything less is cheating them of an opportunity to succeed in the larger world when they leave school. Of course there will have to be individual pedagogical adaptations where needed as pointed out by both Sunayana and Miryam.