Mereka masih bersyukur

https://www.facebook.com/mordintberutu/videos/1141579405939053/ Mereka masih bersyukur masih adakah diantara kita yang mengeluh ? . Sempatkan menulis Aamin dikomentar semoga Aallah selalu mengampuni dosa2 kita..Aamin

Read more »

ADAPTED PHYSICAL EDUCATION

ADAPTED PHYSICAL EDUCATION

dapted physical education (APE) is specially de-signed instruction in physical education intended to address the unique needs of individuals. While the roots of adapted physical education can be traced back to Swedish medical gymnastics in the 1700s, adapted physical education, as practiced today, has been significantly shaped by the mandates of the In-dividuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This act, enacted in 1997, amended the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, which was enact-ed in 1975 and stipulated that all children with dis-abilities had a right to special education.
The IDEA Mandates
Specifically, IDEA defined special education as ‘‘spe-cially designed instruction, at no cost to parents or guardians, to meet the unique needs of a child with a disability, including—(A) instruction conducted in the classroom, in the home, in hospitals, and in-stitutions, and in other settings; and (B) instruction in physical education.’’ The inclusion of physical ed-ucation in the definition of special education is sig-nificant for two reasons. First, it identified physical education as a direct service that must be provided to all students who qualify for special education ser-vices as opposed to related services, such as physical or occupational therapy, that are required only when they are needed for a child to benefit from a special education service. Second, it highlighted the impor-tance of physical education for students with disabil-ities.
IDEA also defined physical education, mandat-ed that all special education services be delivered in the least restrictive environment (LRE), and pre-scribed a management document called an Individu-alized Education Program (IEP). Physical education was defined as ‘‘the development of: (A) physical and motor fitness; (B) fundamental motor skills and patterns; and (C) skills in aquatics, dance, and indi-vidual and group games and sports (including intra-mural and lifetime sports.’’ IDEA further delineated that ‘‘physical education services, specially designed if necessary, must be made available to every handi-capped child receiving a free appropriate public edu-cation’’ and that ‘‘if specially designed physical education is prescribed in a child’s individualized education program, the public agency responsible for the education of that child shall provide the ser-vice directly, or make arrangements for it to be pro-vided through other public or private programs.’’
With respect to LRE, IDEA stated the following: ‘‘To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including those in public or private in-stitutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who do not have disabilities; and . . . special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the na-ture and severity of the disability is such that educa-tion in regular classes cannot be achieved satisfactorily.’’
To ensure that IDEA was implemented as in-tended, the act required that IEPs must be developed and monitored for all students who qualify for spe-cial education. The IEP is developed by a team and includes the student’s present level of performance; annual goals and short-term instructional objectives; specific educational services that will be provided and the extent to which the student will participate in regular education programs; any needed transi-tion services; the projected dates for the initiation and duration of services; and objective criteria and procedures for evaluating, at least annually, progress on the stated goals and instructional objectives.
Finally, IDEA mandated that qualified person-nel deliver special education instruction. In this con-text, ‘‘qualified’’ meant that a person has ‘‘met State educational agency approved or recognized certifica-tion, licensing, registration, or other comparable re-quirements which apply to the area in which he or she is providing special education or related ser-vices.’’
In summary, the legal basis for adapted physical education results from the mandates that require that all students who qualify for special education must receive physical education. If specially designed physical education is required, then these services must be stated in the IEP, delivered in the LRE, and provided by a qualified teacher.
It is important to note that while IDEA requires that all students who qualify for special education have a right to adapted physical education if needed to address their unique needs, adapted physical edu-cation is, can, and should be provided to all students who have unique physical and motor needs that can-not be adequately addressed in the regular physical education program. It is not uncommon, for exam-ple, for many students to have temporary orthopedic disabilities such as sprained ankles, broken limbs, or muscle strains during their school years. Short-term APE programs would be appropriate for these stu-dents both to assist in the rehabilitation of their inju-ries and to minimize any fitness and/or skill deficits that may occur during their recovery. Other students may have mild physical or health impairments, such as asthma or diabetes, that do not interfere with their educational performance enough to qualify them for special education but that are severe enough to war-rant special accommodations and considerations in physical education.
In the United States physical education and most major sport/recreation programs for youth are school centered, hence the emphasis on education in the terms physical education and adapted physical ed-ucation. In other countries, physical education, rec-reation, and sport are commonly conducted independent or outside of the schools and sponsored by other organizations and agencies. In these set-tings, the term adapted physical activity may be used instead of adapted physical education.
Trends and Issues
Although IDEA has provided a sound legal basis for adapted physical education, there are still a number of issues that need to be resolved by the profession to ensure that the physical and motor needs of all students with disabilities are appropriately ad-dressed. Two major issues relate to who is qualified to provide APE services and how decisions are made regarding the appropriate physical education place-ment for students with disabilities.
Who is qualified? While IDEA specified that physi-cal education services, specially designed if neces-sary, must be made available to every child with a disability receiving a free appropriate education, it stopped short of defining who was qualified to provide these services. IDEA stated that it was the re-sponsibility of the states to establish teacher certifi-cation requirements. Unlike other special education areas (e.g., teachers of individuals with mental retar-dation or learning disabilities), most states did not have in place defined certification requirements for teachers of adapted physical education. Given the fiscal constraints placed on schools by the mandates of IDEA, most states were reluctant to place addi-tional demands on their schools by forcing them to hire APE specialists. As a result, by 1991 only four-teen states had actually defined an endorsement or certification in adapted physical education.
The existence of a mandate that required that services be provided but that did not define who was qualified to provide these services created a dilemma for both teachers and students. In many cases, regu-lar physical educators with little or no training relat-ed to individuals with disabilities and/or therapists with no training in physical education were assigned the responsibility of addressing the physical educa-tion needs of students with disabilities. Since these teachers do not have the prerequisite skills to address the needs of these students, these needs are largely going unaddressed. To respond to this situation, the National Consortium for Physical Education and Recreation for Individuals with Disabilities (NC-PERID) created national standards and a voluntary national certification exam for adapted physical edu-cation. The adapted physical education national standards (APENS) delineate the content that adapt-ed physical educators should know across fifteen standards. The national exam has been administered annually since 1997 at more than eighty test sites in the United States.
While the creation of the APE national stan-dards and the national certification exam have been significant steps toward addressing the issue of who is qualified to teach APE, much more work still needs to be done. The NCPERID is working with a small number of states on developing a process through which states can adopt the NCPERID APE standards and APE national certification exam as their state credential. It is hoped that a uniform cer-tification similar to the APENS exam will be adopted by all states by 2010, and this issue will be resolved.
How are placement decisions made? The intent of defining physical education as a direct service, spe-cially designed if necessary, in IDEA was to ensure that the physical and motor development needs of these students were not ignored or sacrificed at the expense of addressing other educational needs. This emphasis was warranted given the extensive research documenting marked physical and motor develop-ment delays and increased health risks (e.g., coro-nary heart disease and obesity) in many children with disabilities. There is also a wealth of research that has shown that well-designed and implemented physical education programs can reduce both physi-cal and motor delays and many health risks in stu-dents with disabilities. While the intent of the law was clear, how it has been implemented has been less then optimal.
What has happened in many schools is that the majority, if not all, of the students with disabilities are being dumped into regular physical education classes. The justification for this practice can be linked to a number of subissues. First, like many other problems in the schools, most schools were not provided with sufficient resources to implement the mandates of IDEA. Given the need to comply with legal mandates and limited resources, many schools were forced to look for ways to meet the let-ter of the law using their existing resources. Two particular mandates shaped this behavior. First, part of the LRE mandate stated that students with disabil-ities be educated in the regular education environ-ments to the maximum extent appropriate. Second, the IEP mandates required only that specially de-signed services be defined and monitored in the IEP. Many schools therefore deduced that if they put all the students with disabilities in regular physical edu-cation, then they would be addressing part of the LRE mandate and at the same time avoiding the ad-ditional time, effort, and costs related to actually cre-ating specially designed physical education programs. Fiscally this solution was very attractive given that most schools lacked qualified personnel who were trained to assess the physical and motor needs of students with disabilities and who could make appropriate decisions regarding what would be the most appropriate (LRE) physical education environment in which to address their needs.
Ideally, this practice would have been identified and stopped during the early years of implementing the law via the required state and federal monitoring procedures. Unfortunately, it was not for a number of reasons. One of the reasons was that the IEP docu-ment was used as the primary monitoring docu-ment. Because physical education was not identified as a needed specially designed service, it was not monitored. In the rare cases in which parents under-stood their rights and demanded specially designed physical education to meet the unique needs of their child, schools tended to handle these requests on an individual basis and subcontract to have these services delivered.
The approach to stopping the practice of placing all students with special needs in regular physical ed-ucation must be multifaceted. The ideal solution would be simply for schools to hire qualified adapted physical educators as intended by the law. This solu-tion, however, is not as simple as it may initially ap-pear. First, schools would have to recognize that their current physical education placement practices were wrong and then be motivated to make a change. In many schools these practices have gone on unquestioned for more than twenty years. In ad-dition, there are no new fiscal resources to hire the additional teachers needed to correct this problem. To obtain additional public monies to fund these positions, schools would have to explain why these new teachers were needed and why they had not provided these appropriate services in the past.
Resolving the problem of inappropriate place-ment of students with disabilities into regular physi-cal education is important not only for the students with disabilities but also for the regular education students and the regular physical education teachers. Research in the field has repeatedly shown that many regular physical educators feel unprepared to ad-dress the needs of students with disabilities and that trying to accommodate the needs of these students has a negative impact on all the students in their classes.
Recognizing the dilemma schools face in resolv-ing this problem, the issue is being addressed at two levels. The first level is to educate schools and state departments of education about this problem and recommend that they develop both long- and short-term solutions. An example of a long-term solution would be to require schools to hire certified adapted physical educators as replacements when existing physical educators retire or leave for other positions. An example of a short-term solution would be to use in-service training programs for school administra-tors and regular physical educators. These programs would focus on educating them on what is appropri-ate physical education and then providing them with some of the fundamental skills needed to offer a con-tinuum of alternative placements in physical educa-tion as intended by the LRE requirements. The second level is to educate parents via the various par-ent advocacy organizations regarding their rights and what should be involved in making an appropriate placement decision in relation to physical education. This information would allow parents to make more informed decisions and to advocate for appropriate physical education services for their children.
Training
Through competitive grant provisions associated with the Education for All Handicapped Children Act and subsequently IDEA, a number of colleges and universities have developed pre-service adapted physical education teacher-training programs. Be-cause adapted physical education training builds upon the traditional teacher training in physical ed-ucation, most adapted physical education training occurs at the master’s level. Most undergraduate physical education teacher preparation programs now include at least one APE course as part of their required curriculum. In recent years, many regular physical education teacher-training programs have also started to offer three- to twelve-credit emphases or minor areas of study in adapted physical educa-tion as part of their undergraduate programs. These emphasis areas typically are composed of one to three theory courses and one to two practical experi-ences where the students can apply their APE course work.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975.
U.S. Public Law 94-142. U.S. Code. Vol. 20, secs. 1401 et seq.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997.
U.S. Public Law 105-17. U.S. Code. Vol. 20, secs. 1400 et seq.
Kelly, Luke E., ed. 1995. Adapted Physical Educa-
tion National Standards. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
Rimmer, James H. 1994. Fitness and Rehabilitation
Programs for Special Populations. Dubuque, IA:
Brown and Benchmark.
Sherrill, Claudine. 1998. Adapted Physical Activi-ty, Recreation, and Sport: Crossdisciplinary and Lifespan, 5th edition. Dubuque, IA: MCB/ McGraw-Hill.
Winnick, Joseph P., ed. 2000. Adapted Physical Ed-ucation and Sport, 3rd edition. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Read more »

HATI-HATI SAAT MEMASAK KANGKUNG.

HATI-HATI SAAT MEMASAK KANGKUNG.

Diharuskan bila anda memasak kangkung, harap belah batangnya !!

Beberapa hari yang lalu, di klinik yang terkenal di Yogya, Semua dokter kebingungan karena ada seorang pemuda asal SOLO bernama Rifai yang menderita sakit perut. Pemuda itu dibawa ke klinik oleh Ortunya setelah 2 hari menderita diare. 

Sudah bermacam obat sakit perut yang diberikan kepada pemuda itu, namun diare tidak kunjung sembuh.

Kemudian Orang tua pemuda tersebut ditanya oleh dokter, "Makanan apa yang di makan oleh pemuda tersebut selama 2 hari ini?" Ortu anak itu kebingungan, karena sejak anaknya diare. Pemuda tersebut tak mau makan, dia hanya minum susu putih, itu pun muntah.

Setelah diperiksa, ternyata sebelum menderita diare, Pemuda itu makan kangkung tumis di restoran bersama Orang tuanya. Dokter segera melakukan rongent, ternyata dalam usus Rifai telah berkembang biak lintah dengan anaknya yang kecil-kecil.

Dokter menyerah dan menyatakan tidak sanggup mengambil tindakan medis apapun. 

Akhirnya pemuda malang itu pun meninggal dun

a. Setelah diteliti, ternyata Lintah berasal dari dalam batang kangkung yang besar.

Memang untuk penggemar kangkung tumis yang paling enak adalah batangnya.

Lintah yg berada di dalam Batang Kangkung itu Tdk akan Mati walau dimasak selama 20 Menit, Apalagi untuk kangkung tumis yang proses memasaknya tidak terlalu lama agar menghasilkan rasa kangkung yang sedap. 

Lintah hanya akan mati jika dibakar !

Dalam usus pemuda tadi, Lintah hanya butuh waktu 1-2 hari untuk berkembang biak. Jika ada keluarga/Teman-teman yang mengalami hal serupa, lakukan tindakan dengan memberi minum "Air Rendaman Tembakau". (bisa diambil dari Rokok Kretek) dan biasanya Lintah "Akan keluar dalam keadaan mati".

Informasikan kepada Keluarga, teman dan sahabat anda.

Ini kisah nyata di Yogyakarta !

INGAT !!! MEMASAK KANGKUNG HARUS DIBELAH DULU BATANGNYA SEBELUM DIMASAK !!

dr.H. Ismuhadi, MPH

Mohon disebarkan sebanyak2 nya, sayangi keluarga dan orang-orang yang kita cintai.

Semoga bermanfaat.

Read more »