|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Diagnosing 'learning difficulties' -or worse- in children
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by infinite_monkey:
It sounds like this wouldn't sit well with you: do you feel as a classroom teacher that you have the time and resources to do that more intensive intervention with top-of-the-tier students while the rest of your students are also in the class?
I can't stomach mixed ability teaching from start to finish. The fact that it leaves weak kids struggling is no suprise. However, this is no excuse for setting up a bureaucracy to diagnose those kids as having Special Needs and provide largely useless interventions for them.
As for treating badly behaved kids as if they have a disability...
...well words fail me.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
As for treating badly behaved kids as if they have a disability...
...well words fail me.
Do you feel the same way about treating kids who have a disability as if they were badly behaved?
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Absolutely. But you have to know what the problem is, before you can decide what the correct intervention is. Until you've done a proper assessment (which would include assessments of sensory impairments), you don't know what you need.
Are we really just going to assume that even at secondary age it is a real to struggle to notice that a kid can't hear or see?
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
quote:
As ever this is the greatest red herring going. Hearing, vision and mixed sensory difficulties combined account for about 3% of SAP and 5% of statements.
Maybe that's because only 3 to 5 percent of the kids have sensory difficulties. Or maybe it's because no one has bothered to assess most of the kids to see whether that's the problem or b]not.
We can speculate indefinitely about undiscovered disabilities, but we know where it leads. It leads to 1 in 5 kids being on the Special Needs register while those children with actual disabilities get a second class service.
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
quote:
[qIt seems highly unlikely that it is teachers who spot most of these, let alone SEN teachers, so trying to turn every SEN case into this sort of problem in order to justify the SEN racket is ridiculous. And that's without the obvious issue that if we did want to spend money on finding these problems then investing in opticians and audiologists, not specialist teachers, would be the obvious way forward
You're right that teachers don't usually pick up on sensory impairments. They usually decide that a child with undiagnosed sensory impairments is lazy, stupid, oppositional, uncooperative, or ill-behaved. That's what it looks like, if you don't know what's going on.
Oh for pity's sake.
How dare you say that about those children. Once again you are suggesting that we treat the badly behaved as if they have disabilities, and suggesting that we pretend the well behaved don't.
This is a recipe for ignoring all the most vulnerable kids and lavishing attention on those who least deserve it.
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
If the "SEN racket" doesn't do proper evaluations for kids having difficulties at school, then you're absolutely right to argue that they're wasting everyone's time and money trying to be sympathetic and supportive without first identifying what it is that needs support.
The problem is that the SEN racket is full of people who think that the academically weak and the badly behaved have secret disabilities.
They are wrong and you are wrong, and that's why in this country we waste an eighth of our education budget on a bureaucracy that pursues this fantasy at the expense of the well behaved and those with real disabilities.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
As for treating badly behaved kids as if they have a disability...
...well words fail me.
Do you feel the same way about treating kids who have a disability as if they were badly behaved?
It doesn't really arise, except in the fantasy world where teachers spend their time yelling at blind kids for losing their library cards, or whatever the appeasers' scenario of the week is.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
As ever this is the greatest red herring going. Hearing, vision and mixed sensory difficulties combined account for about 3% of SAP and 5% of statements. It seems highly unlikely that it is teachers who spot most of these, let alone SEN teachers, so trying to turn every SEN case into this sort of problem in order to justify the SEN racket is ridiculous. And that's without the obvious issue that if we did want to spend money on finding these problems then investing in opticians and audiologists, not specialist teachers, would be the obvious way forward.
But the thing is, you're not going to know that until the assessment process.
Are you seriously talking about the SEN process here?
Are you really denying that people discover they have sight and hearing problems without an SEN teacher being involved?
This seems ridiculous.
Again, I have no experience with the SEN process. But in the US, frequently visual and hearing impairments-- even severe ones like my son's-- are very often first diagnosed as a result of a special ed. assessment. That was the case for my son. Again, for the child it's normal. They have no way of knowing they need to ask for help. The presenting symptoms often are identical to those of a learning disability.
QUOTE]Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
On the one hand we have a trained optician doing a test. On the other hand we have people with no medical or opthalmic qualifications labelling a fifth of the school population and swallowing 13% of the education budget on diagnoses that are unnecessary and interventions that do no good.
Which do you think is more likely to quickly and efficiently reveal a sight problem?
As I have said several times, I don't know the SEN process. I am arguing for a holistic process which would include visual tests being given by a trained optician and auditory tests being given by a trained audiologist. My argument-- which I think I stated rather clearly in the paragraph immediately below the one you quoted (reprinted below)-- is that if the SEN process does not include that sort of assessment by appropriate professionals, then the solution is not throwing out SEN & assessments, but reforming SEN so that it does provide the proper sorts of assessments.
QUOTE]Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
If the SEN process is not set up to identify and address those sorts of "physical" impairments (although I would suggest that the distinction between "physical" and "mental" impairments is somewhat artificial) than that would significantly impact it's effectiveness. If that's the case, I would humbly suggest that that might be a better place to focus one's concerns, rather that the dismantling of the entire SEN system.
I'm trying to follow the logic here, but it is escaping me. How is thinking of a type of diagnosis that would be useful an argument for keeping the people who are wasting billions on meaningless diagnoses? By all means take money from the SEN racket and put it into children's health services, but don't pretend that the SEN racket is providing those services already or that the people running the SEN racket are qualified to provide those services.
I don't see how anything in the paragraph you quote here could be construed as suggesting that I would "pretend that the SEN racket is providing those services already or that the people running the SEN racket are qualified to provide those services." The paragraph is framed around my acknowledgment that I DON'T know what sorts of assessments SEN provides or who performs them. The entire paragraph was a statement that if SEN does not do that, it should.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Because the impairment seems normal to the child they're unlikely to ask for help or even realize they need help (my son certainly didn't).
I went suddenly and rapidly short-sighted at about 12 years old. no-one in my family wore glasses, so it never occurred to me that I might have a problem with my eyesight. The only 'symptom' was that my marks in French went rapidly downhill, because I couldn't spell the words properly. Unknown to me, this was because I hadn't been able to see them on the board to copy them accurately. As I was a high-attaining child, I managed fine when copying English because I had no need to see every letter - I could recognise the words.
Not one teacher mentioned the possibility of short-sightedness to me, even though it's very common for children to develop this condition at or around puberty. My mother finally figured it out when we went to Wales that summer, and it became clear that I couldn't see the little trains on Mount Snowden!
I am in the middle in this debate. I've seen some pretty flakey diagnoses in my time as a university lecturer, but I certainly do recognise that problems are not always apparent to the sufferer. If I had said that I couldn't see the board, the teacher would have moved me to the front of the class. I didn't say because I didn't know. I just accepted that I 'couldn't get the hang of' French.
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
If you are going to claim the unanimous support of all 115 sources then, yes, it would be normal to check that they actually agreed with the conclusions.
Where was that claim of unanimous support made? Genuine question.
What I said was, (with key words now emboldened)
"The Rose Report from 2009 on dyslexia took evidence from more than 115 sources, reports, research projects and learned experts in the field of dyslexia across the world, before recommending that we put into place the 4000 specialist dyslexia teachers. I would find it difficult to believe that more than 115 separate well regarded sources/publications/reports are all wrong"
Weighing up evidence to reach a conclusion and then write a report based on those conclusions does not suggest that all 115 reports etc agreed 100% nor that they had to?
Does that help?
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liopleurodon
Mighty sea creature
# 4836
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Do you feel the same way about treating kids who have a disability as if they were badly behaved?
quote:
It doesn't really arise, except in the fantasy world where teachers spend their time yelling at blind kids for losing their library cards, or whatever the appeasers' scenario of the week is.
It happened to me all the time as a kid, and I'm - like I said - very high-functioning. I wasn't intentionally defiant or disruptive but I often got into trouble for "being rude" in response to questions I misunderstood because of the ASD. Taking things literally, not understanding that you're sometimes expected to lie or say nothing - all of these things can make you appear rude. I have a much better understanding of that now, but at the time it was difficult and a major source of anxiety.
[ 16. September 2010, 16:02: Message edited by: Liopleurodon ]
Posts: 1921 | From: Lurking under the ship | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
Just read this letter on the Guardian website:
quote:
In addition to those who are wrongly diagnosed, there is also a large number of children who do not receive a diagnosis and who struggle to achieve in school as a direct result of undiagnosed problems with hearing, vision, motor skills, abnormal brainwave variants and in some cases even mild cerebral palsy.
This growing problem of "missed diagnosis" results from a combination of the phasing out of developmental testing of all children by a school doctor at the time of school entry and the handing over of responsibility for the diagnosis and management of special needs from the domain of medicine to education in the 1980s. This has meant that problems of a medical nature are often overlooked and misdiagnosed as a specific learning difficulty.
Research carried out in UK schools with more than a thousand children five years ago indicated that 48% of five- to six-year-olds and 35% of eight- to nine-year-olds in the sample did not have all the physical skills in place needed to support reading, writing, spelling and maths. A more recent survey carried out in the north of England suggests that the number may be even higher in areas of social deprivation.
It is not only teaching and pastoral care that is needed but a national programme of screening children's developmental status at the time of school entry and monitoring it throughout the educational process, and improved communication and co-operation between the professional domains of education, medicine and educational psychology, to provide effective treatment or remedial intervention.
Sally Goddard Blythe
Director, The Institute for Neuro-Physiological Psychology
I had forgotten that as a small child I was examined by the school doctor before I started at school. I had pretty much forgotten about it. I also have vague recollections of having a sight test while at infant school. For those of you who aren't familiar with the history of the SEN racket, it was first set up in the early eighties, so if this letter is correct it was roughly at the same time as the school doctor was phased out. It hadn't dawned on me before that the SEN racket had replaced actual medical testing.
All of which puts the claim that we need the SEN racket to diagnose medical problems in a different perspective.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
Where was that claim of unanimous support made? Genuine question.
It is implicit in this argument:
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
I would find it difficult to believe that more than 115 separate well regarded sources/publications/reports are all wrong"
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Do you feel the same way about treating kids who have a disability as if they were badly behaved?
quote:
It doesn't really arise, except in the fantasy world where teachers spend their time yelling at blind kids for losing their library cards, or whatever the appeasers' scenario of the week is.
It happened to me all the time as a kid, and I'm - like I said - very high-functioning. I wasn't intentionally defiant or disruptive but I often got into trouble for "being rude" in response to questions I misunderstood because of the ASD. Taking things literally, not understanding that you're sometimes expected to lie or say nothing - all of these things can make you appear rude. I have a much better understanding of that now, but at the time it was difficult and a major source of anxiety.
I got the cane/ruler/hit by teachers on a very regular basis for being 'rude' and for not doing what they had asked me to do. In each instance, it was autism behaviour that was being punished. In each case, to me, the punishment appeared to be totally random and taught me nothing whatsoever.
If only it was all a fantasy....
I have nightmares even now where I'm back at school and going through the living hell all over again. Whilst this is one personal story, it would suggest (combined with L's response above) that such things do happen.
Amongst friends (and bear in mind that autistic people don't have hundreds of friends), a son who was found to be 80% blind only after 3 years of many teachers telling him that he wasn't paying attention.
Another who turned out to only have sight in one eye who was regularly mocked by his PE teachers for not being able to calculate how to catch a ball. He thought that's how all people saw, so had compensated.
Another who turned out to be 60% deaf, left in the classroom and almost entirely unable to follow proceedings.
Another who has just been kicked out of school now diagnosed with profound dyslexia (too late) after many years of some of teachers making scathing comments about how useless he was.
There are good schools and good teachers and pockets of excellence, of course. I have a number of teachers who are friends of mine who do a truly excellent job in very tough circumstances. But those are the sorts of children who could do with diagnosis, and who I am told need specialised support to get them back on track.
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
Where was that claim of unanimous support made? Genuine question.
It is implicit in this argument:
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
I would find it difficult to believe that more than 115 separate well regarded sources/publications/reports are all wrong"
No.
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
I heard the other day of someone (now probably in his 50s) who wasn't diagnosed as being deaf until he was in secondary school.
Carys
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trudy Scrumptious
BBE Shieldmaiden
# 5647
|
Posted
Total blindness or deafness might be hard to miss right up through elementary school to high school, but I find it easy to believe of hearing loss or visual impairment. The only educational assessment I ever actually completed was done on a 19-year-old young man who was in our adult-ed program. I ended up recommending him for an eye test and it emerged that this boy, who had been through a series of foster homes and group homes since age 10 or so, had never been taken to have his eyes tested. He needed glasses, probably had for years, and got them. Big improvement in his reading. Hardly an earth-shattering story but I'm sure things like that happen quite often, especially in kids who don't come from the sort of background where regular eye test and doctor's appointments are part of the routine.
--------------------
Books and things.
I lied. There are no things. Just books.
Posts: 7428 | From: Closer to Paris than I am to Vancouver | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
It was a regular conversation with parents - when had the child had their hearing tested or eyesight checked to exclude those problems when children were struggling in school. The next problem was to convince the students to wear the glasses that were prescribed and not lose them all the time.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
All of which puts the claim that we need the SEN racket to diagnose medical problems in a different perspective.
I don't think anyone on this thread has claimed that "we need the SEN racket to diagnose medical problems." I think the claim has been that many, many children have medical problems that affect their learning and behavior, that these problems are frequently not diagnosed or treated, and that children who have these problems should be identified and helped.
I understand that you think SEN is a waste of time and money, and does more harm than good. From what I've learned on this thread, that may well be true. But saying "Dismantle SEN" isn't enough. If you want to dismantle it, what do you want to replace it with? How are the children with sensory, motor, and neurological impairments going to be identified and helped?
If you were to ask me, I'd say that
quote:
a national programme of screening children's developmental status at the time of school entry and monitoring it throughout the educational process, and improved communication and co-operation between the professional domains of education, medicine and educational psychology, to provide effective treatment or remedial intervention.
sounds like a good start. That's something I would think that everyone could get behind.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
It was a regular conversation with parents - when had the child had their hearing tested or eyesight checked to exclude those problems when children were struggling in school. The next problem was to convince the students to wear the glasses that were prescribed and not lose them all the time.
I have a friend exceptionally bright, whose hearing is and has nearly always* been seriously impaired. She did not get diagnosed until quite late in her school career simply because her mother would not believe it.
Jengie
*She has had several operations for it, following one she had for a while perfect hearing but that did not last. However I suspect the long term impact of the operations has actually been detrimental to her hearing.
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Josephine, oldandrew has stated he does not like mixed ability teaching and teaching students with learning and behaviour difficulties in mainstream schools.
If those children are then to be educated (presumably oldandrew thinks they should be educated?) special schools will need to be built and re-established. That is far more expensive than SEN support in mainstream. I have been begged by the Local Authority to put together a package to keep one child in mainstream who really was not coping, because it was going to cost something like 5 to 10 times as much to place that child in a special school as the most expensive things I could dream up to maintain that child in mainstream. We're talking the difference between £10,000 or £20,000 and £100,000. That child was moved to a special school.
I don't think that the SEN system is working particularly well, but there are several things going on here:
- secondary school SEN registers tend to be made up of historic decisions - the lists from primary schools. It's very time-consuming reviewing the register regularly
- students will be on the register for a range of reasons, it depends on which criteria have been used - academic - considering how far behind they are; involvement of outside bodies or other issues;
- more and more students are being moved into mainstream schooling and this is becoming a feedback system - as the special schools cater for the most disabled students, parents refuse to place their children in the special school and insist on mainstream, which leaves the special schools looking less and less attractive to parents.
- Government and local authority policy is to move students into mainstream - the places are much cheaper. Ten or fifteen years ago, students with moderate learning difficulties had places in special schools, nowadays more students with severe learning difficulties are ending up in mainstream - and these secondary schools are not equipped to deal with teaching students on P scales
- to reduce costs further the hoops that have to be got through to obtain additional funding for students have got more stringent. When I started assessing students for statements the academic requirements for a statement were being 6 or 7 years behind the expected levels for their chronological age. That then extended. That means that a year 7 class full of 11 year olds could have students achieving at average 5 year old level up to 15 year old level. The students getting help were achieving below 5 year old standards, formerly those at 6 year old levels were getting help.
- to get support, you have to prove that everything else has been tried and that the student is still not achieving - which again is very time consuming - and that child is falling more and more behind while this goes on.
- as you can see from oldandrew's posts, not everyone is comfortable with the need to support these students in mainstream.
If you have a student who has the reading age of a 6 year old in a mainstream classroom (secondary is age 11 to 16 or 18, most text books have a reading age of at least 9 years, most GCSE exams have a reading age of 15) they are likely to get frustrated and act up/out, so lots of provisions have to be put in place, and the schools are expected to do this with less and less funding to do so.
The English system is to put students up chronologically, so whether or not the student can cope they move up through the years and finish at 16 with whatever qualifications they can be got through. Schools are partially measured on the points that students achieve in their exams so many schools are reluctant to put students in for qualifications with a lower points tariff, and if the students are achieving below a certain point the exam board won't give concessions.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Antisocial Alto
Shipmate
# 13810
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
The English system is to put students up chronologically, so whether or not the student can cope they move up through the years and finish at 16 with whatever qualifications they can be got through.
Doing this and, at the same time, having mixed ability classrooms seems crazy to me. Surely it would be easier on the teachers not to have to deal with such a wide variety of skill levels all at the same time?
Posts: 601 | From: United States | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
I have been trying to avoid responding to personal anecdotes, simply because scepticism, even about how common a situation is, tends to offend.
However, I'm not going to accept the deluge of hearing and seeing related anecdotes as a good case for an epidemic of undiagnosed sensory disabilities. Stories of late diagnoses are always more memorable than ones of timely diagnosis. That's why we have all, no doubt, heard stories of women giving birth on the toilet. It doesn't mean it's happening all the time.
I'm sure spotting sight and hearing problems might be important with very young children, and that, if you define it strictly enough, you can declare some huge proportion of the student population to have sensory disabilites. Once you've done this then anyone desperate to find alibis for poor behaviour, effort or ability can add this to the list of excuses. But the idea that in the classroom we have an army of students struggling to see or hear but unable to realise it or unwilling to say when it happens, is ludicrous. You only have to listen to the barrage of complaints if the sun obscures the board or the classroom next door is noisy to know that students will usually say when they can't see or haven't heard.
That said, if people are convinced that this is a significant problem (some non-anecdotal evidence would be good) then a screening programme would be a much better idea than leaving diagnosis to specialist SEN teachers on the basis of behaviour or academic difficulties.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Antisocial Alto - most schools set and stream for at least some subjects so not everything is taught in mixed ability - maths and science are pretty much universally taught in sets, English and humanities not always. The problem is that if you end up with a bottom set of *thickies* you can very often create a disaffected group who are disruptive to everyone else, because however you code that classification, it gets known across the school.
In some subjects academic achievement may be immaterial - things like Resistant Material (metalwork and woodwork) and PE (sports) - until it has to be written up and all the literacy problems return.
[ 17. September 2010, 06:49: Message edited by: Curiosity killed ... ]
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
I'm not going to accept the deluge of hearing and seeing related anecdotes as a good case for an epidemic of undiagnosed sensory disabilities.
The letter you cited above says
quote:
there is also a large number of children who do not receive a diagnosis and who struggle to achieve in school as a direct result of undiagnosed problems with hearing, vision, motor skills, abnormal brainwave variants and in some cases even mild cerebral palsy.
I don't know whether your "epidemic" and her "large number of children" are in the same ballpark, but it would seem that at least some experts have reason to believe large numbers of children "struggle to achieve in school as a direct result of undiagnosed problems."
If it's not considered cost-effective to screen all children (and it might not be; I certainly don't know how frequent the condition is, or would have to be to make universal screening cost-effective), then screening children who are struggling academically or behaviorally would make sense.
And if it turns out that they're all just ill-behaved brats, then the screening program could be abandoned. But if it turns out the person who wrote that letter is right, and there are large numbers of children, the screening would identify them, and the could get the help they need.
What would be wrong with that?
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
I have been trying to avoid responding to personal anecdotes, simply because scepticism, even about how common a situation is, tends to offend.
However, I'm not going to accept the deluge of hearing and seeing related anecdotes as a good case for an epidemic of undiagnosed sensory disabilities. Stories of late diagnoses are always more memorable than ones of timely diagnosis. That's why we have all, no doubt, heard stories of women giving birth on the toilet. It doesn't mean it's happening all the time.
I'm sure spotting sight and hearing problems might be important with very young children, and that, if you define it strictly enough, you can declare some huge proportion of the student population to have sensory disabilites. Once you've done this then anyone desperate to find alibis for poor behaviour, effort or ability can add this to the list of excuses. But the idea that in the classroom we have an army of students struggling to see or hear but unable to realise it or unwilling to say when it happens, is ludicrous. You only have to listen to the barrage of complaints if the sun obscures the board or the classroom next door is noisy to know that students will usually say when they can't see or haven't heard.
Might I point out that you have also only provided us with anecdotal evidence, including the above? And when we requested something more substantial we were accused of "assigning essay questions".
And the anecdotal evidence you supply above would, if anything, imply the opposite of what you suggest. Since again we are not talking about kids with 100% hearing or vision loss going undiagnosed, but rather kids like my own with significant impairment. The kinds of obstacles/ distractions you are describing will be experienced much more acutely by kids with impairment than those with perfect vision/hearing. People with hearing loss are notoriously affected by ambient noise in ways those with perfect hearing are not. Issues of lighting and contrast are much more significant for someone like my son than for those with 20/20 vision.
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
That said, if people are convinced that this is a significant problem (some non-anecdotal evidence would be good) then a screening programme would be a much better idea than leaving diagnosis to specialist SEN teachers on the basis of behaviour or academic difficulties.
And again, that's pretty much what everyone here is suggesting. However, again, since the manifesting symptoms of hearing/vision loss may be identical to those of learning disabilities, having a common point of entry is going to be key. If SEN teachers are not trained to do rudimentary vision & hearing assessments, again, they should be, with of course the understanding that a preliminary tentative pre-diagnosis would be confirmed by a medical professional. (This is the process by which my son's severe impairment was discovered). Such a system would be far less expensive (which seems to be a key concern for you) than having every child experiencing any sort of classroom or learning difficulties immediately assessed by an optician and an audiologist. Which argues again, for reforming/ augmenting/ refining the SEN system rather than dismantling it.
And, while I of course am, because of my particular life experiences, very concerned that undiagnosed hearing and visual impairments be identified, I am uncomfortable with the implication that these sorts of impairments or difficulties are somehow categorically different or "more worthy" than other sorts of learning difficulties. The only real difference is that they happen to be easier to quantify and correct.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jemima the 9th
Shipmate
# 15106
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
That said, if people are convinced that this is a significant problem (some non-anecdotal evidence would be good) then a screening programme would be a much better idea than leaving diagnosis to specialist SEN teachers on the basis of behaviour or academic difficulties. [/QB]
*non-specialist alert*
I'm not familiar with education literature. However, there was a piece on In Touch on R4 last week, here for those of us with listen again facilities:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00tmt9c#synopsis
highlighting the concern raised by the Association of Optometrists about how many children's failing eyesight is missed by their schools.
Children *should* have access to a free eyesight test which should be carried out soon after they start infant school. However, it's down to the PCTs to decide how this is implemented. In some schools it's done by ?school nurse - I think it was in ours, in some the parents are just told that their right exists, and it's left to them to take it up. It all seems to be a bit patchy.
[anecdote] In Child A's class of 30, 2 children were diagnosed as requiring glasses after the infant school test. Child A's blind-as-a-batness was missed, and no one knew there was a problem 'til she remarked to me on the way to school about the reading scheme: "Mummy, you know when we do ERP? Well I can't see the words, so I have a game I play. I listen to the other children and then repeat the words they say." Prescription initially +4.5, improving now but too late to fix completely. So that's 10% in an ordinary common-or-garden sort of school...[/anecdote]
[ 17. September 2010, 16:06: Message edited by: Jemima the 9th ]
Posts: 801 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Might I point out that you have also only provided us with anecdotal evidence,
You can point it out but it won't make it true. I keep mentioning research only for it to be ignored or dismissed.
If I haven't mentioned non-anecdotal evidence here it's because I don't have any. Perhaps there really is this hidden epidemic of poor sight and hearing. I'm just saying that it doesn't fit my experience and I see no proper evidence for it.
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
And again, that's pretty much what everyone here is suggesting.
The point is that it has been used as an outrageous red herring (if you'll pardon the non-literal terminology).
We were discussing why people who can't read need an SEN diagnosis rather than simply better teaching. Suddenly it turned out they didn't need a conventional SEN diagnosis at all, but a medical one for sensory disabilities. No decent evidence has been put forward for this, but it has been used effectively to change skew things away from the point about being unable to read.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
I don't know whether your "epidemic" and her "large number of children" are in the same ballpark, but it would seem that at least some experts have reason to believe large numbers of children "struggle to achieve in school as a direct result of undiagnosed problems."
I've absolutely no idea how expert she is, I mentioned her letter because it reminded me how things used to be done before the SEN racket.
But as I say, my point on this is that even if the claims are true, it doesn't justify the SEN racket which hardly seems to be an efficient method to screen for sight and hearing problems.
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
If it's not considered cost-effective to screen all children (and it might not be; I certainly don't know how frequent the condition is, or would have to be to make universal screening cost-effective), then screening children who are struggling academically or behaviorally would make sense.
It would only make sense if it was probable that kids who were struggling academically or behaviourally were likely to have sight or hearing problems which is the very thing that nobody seems able to demonstrate.
We seem to have this ridiculous situation where people are arguing that a system which labels 1 in 5 students, costs more than an eighth of the education budget and lasts for (at least) 11 years of schooling is somehow justified by the need for the sort of one-off medical (not educational but medical) checks that the people who work in the system aren't actually qualified to do.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
What you call the SEN racket, oldandrew, is an attempt to paper over the cracks when policy on special needs changed to put as many students as possible in mainstream, the institution of an entitlement National Curriculum which means all students have to be taught everything on the National Curriculum and the measurement of schools by results. It's not the SEN departments you should be railing against, but the educational and health decisions that have made them necessary.
Eye and hearing tests are not carried out by the SEN department - they are carried out by the school nurse. All the SEN department does is ask permission from the parents and refer to the school nurse.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
I've been reading this thread, though I don't understand a lot of it, and I haven't commented. But here's one thing I have to ask.
All the people posting here with anecdotal evidence about profound sensory deficits going undiagnosed until fairly high ages. I'm confused. In most cases a simple auditory or optical test would have discovered these at a much earlier age if it had been done.
That these problems aren't being discovered til later in life, isn't this just showing up that there's some serious flaw in the SEN program, which is what oldandrew has been arguing all along?
I mean, my older brother was diagnosed as autistic 47 years ago, when he was 3. The very first thing that was ruled out as the cause of his problems when making the diagnosis (or at least according to my mother, this was before I was born) was the possibility of deafness. He was about 2 at the time. And this was years ago, as I said! Surely things should have improved by this time, rather than devolved to kids not being identified or tested.
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
What you call the SEN racket, oldandrew, is an attempt to paper over the cracks when policy on special needs changed to put as many students as possible in mainstream, the institution of an entitlement National Curriculum which means all students have to be taught everything on the National Curriculum and the measurement of schools by results. It's not the SEN departments you should be railing against, but the educational and health decisions that have made them necessary.
If there hadn't been a ready supply of appeasers to run the departments then the policy would have had to be reconsidered. The people in those departments who obstruct teachers, spread bad practice, promote pseudo-science and urban myths and spoil badly behaved kids are to blame for their actions. Identifying non-existent conditions and providing useless or harmful interventions is not papering over the cracks, it's widening them.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
PhilA
shipocaster
# 8792
|
Posted
We have around 30% of students at my school on the SEN register. When I look at some of them, I'm not sure that they do have special educational needs but behavioural difficulties.
On the other hand, one of my Y9s, (13-14) told me the other day he was proud that he had spelled his name right for the first time without help recently...
One of the effects of giving a child a label is that it gives the school an excuse as to why the kid fails. Also, with a large SEN register comes a larger budget, and a more understanding OFSTED if little Billy pulls a blinder and sticks his bum out of the window.
To a certain extent, I am sure that SEN is a bit of a scam and people are miss diagnosed by non medical staff. However, I am also sure that for many kids with various issues, whether that is lacking social skills or any mild disorder, a bit of extra help - a crutch to lean on - can be a massive help to self esteem and confidence if nothing else.
--------------------
To err is human. To arr takes a pirate.
Posts: 3121 | From: Sofa | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
And you're the person unhappy at personal attacks - yeah right.
What you are calling appeasing I would describe as an attempt to ensure students who are struggling in mainstream are educated. Usually because I know, however much some teachers prefer that student was not in mainstream, that actually there is no other option. The local special school only taught students up to National Curriculum level 2 - that's the expected level for a 7 year old. They wouldn't take any student who was going to achieve more than that by the time they were 16. There were no EBD places locally (in county) for girls, and very few for boys, there were no ASD special schools locally (in county) and the local authority would not send students out of county as that escalated costs.
You'll be surprised to know I fought very hard for some children to be placed in special schools - didn't always win, but I damn well tried. But having not won that battle, and having the local authority place them in mainstream, then for the child's sake we had to make it work. It really wasn't the child's fault that the default was mainstream and placement elsewhere took a lot of battling, on behalf of the primary and secondary school involved and the parents.
And in case you haven't noticed, I have put my money where my mouth is and have been teaching AltEd for the past couple of years. Those year 10 and 11 students whose school placements have failed - so trying to educate those students and help the mainstream school teach the majority.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
What you are calling appeasing I would describe as an attempt to ensure students who are struggling in mainstream are educated.
I think I've explained quite enough times that this isn't what happens.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
In your opinion or experience. Not in mine.
Well quite.
For people working in the SEN racket then all their interventions make a lot of difference. But it's the ordinary classroom teachers that end up having to pick up the pieces.
[ 17. September 2010, 20:51: Message edited by: oldandrew ]
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
That these problems aren't being discovered til later in life, isn't this just showing up that there's some serious flaw in the SEN program, which is what oldandrew has been arguing all along?
Not quite. Oldandrew is arguing that SEN be dismantled, and a single "good teaching method" be used for all under-achieving students. The rest of us are arguing that rather than dismantling SEN, it should be reformed/ improved, so that, for example, such things as sensory problems are screened.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Antisocial Alto
Shipmate
# 13810
|
Posted
cliffdweller, if you feel OK about sharing more, would you mind telling us a little more about your son's vision trouble? Why wasn't his pediatrician able to catch it?
Posts: 601 | From: United States | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemrw:
That these problems aren't being discovered til later in life, isn't this just showing up that there's some serious flaw in the SEN program, which is what oldandrew has been arguing all along?
Not quite. Oldandrew is arguing that SEN be dismantled, and a single "good teaching method" be used for all under-achieving students. The rest of us are arguing that rather than dismantling SEN, it should be reformed/ improved, so that, for example, such things as sensory problems are screened.
Absolute fantasy. All I said was that for students who are poor readers there was one single treatment.
The idea that "poor readers" meant the blind and the deaf was a red herring the supporters of the SEN racket came up with.
Acting as if SEN departments mainly deal with physical disabilities, has been a recurring tactic on this thread, and this is just the latest variation on that.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Antisocial Alto:
cliffdweller, if you feel OK about sharing more, would you mind telling us a little more about your son's vision trouble? Why wasn't his pediatrician able to catch it?
Ultimately it was caught by his pediatrician, but relatively late in the game. It was beyond her scope, but she thankfully referred him on to a pediatric optomologist. This was around the time he was beginning to be identified for classroom behavior/ attention problems which turned out to be vision-related.
Part of the problem here in the US is the crappy state of our medical system, which sucks. It's a whole 'nother thread, but you wouldn't believe what we had to go through to get him the help he needed (surgery, consultations with pediatric opthamologist, continued care-- it has literally taken years, and some very savvy "working the system"). But that's another thread.
Part of the problem is, of course, ours. I guessed he probably needed glasses-- everyone in our family has 'em. But I was more focused on his older brother who had more acute classroom problems and things that looked to the untrained eye like vision-related problems. Older son had all sorts of eye-hand coordination difficulties, couldn't catch a ball, reading difficulties, classroom behavior issues. He was the "squeaky wheel" that drew the attention of both school and, I confess, parents. Younger son loved & excelled at sports, could throw & catch a ball, reasonable eye-hand coordination, milder classroom behavior issues. Only symptom there was behind the curve on reading. I-- and the school-- was so focused on older son that it never occurred to me that his problem might be more acute.
Turned out older son had only mild vision problems, easily corrected with glasses. His problem turned out to be more closely related to those "less worthy" non-sensory learning/ processing conditions that oldandrew doesn't seem to think we should be throwing our $$ at. Younger son's uncorrected vision turned out to 20/500. One surgery (another US health care nightmare to arrange), monthly visits to pediatric opthamologist, and 4 years of "patching" later, his vision now corrects to 20/30.
Moral of the story I think is that we can't rely on "squeaky wheels" alone, nor can we rely on kids speaking up and asking for help. (Again, younger son was born with his condition so thought his vision was normal). Learning and sensory disabilities are not always immediately obvious.
Again, I know nothing of SEN or whether it does a good or poor job of screening for these sorts of things. Obviously the US system is deeply flawed. My only point is that a system is needed, that oldandrew's suggestion of dismantling SEN is not a good one.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
[QUOTE]
The idea that "poor readers" meant the blind and the deaf was a red herring the supporters of the SEN racket came up with.
Acting as if SEN departments mainly deal with physical disabilities, has been a recurring tactic on this thread, and this is just the latest variation on that.
Actually, the red herring is your consistent strawman that anyone here has claimed that SEN deals with physical disabilities. What has been said, several times, is that assessments should include screening for sensory impairments. Again, if SEN does not do this, then SEN should be reformed to provide this. But, however flawed SEN may be (and I have no way of knowing since you have offered us very little info that would be helpful in discerning what the specific problems might be) a system like SEN is the most efficient place to do at least preliminary screening/ diagnosis. If SEN is dismantled, it will need to be replaced by something that serves a similar purpose.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
I'll give an example of the sort of strategy that was seen as appeasement. As a whole school policy it was requested that nobody used hangman as a teaching tool - it can be used as a starter to teach odd spellings or revise new vocabulary. The reason was that there were three students in the school who had seen their fathers hang themselves, different families, and still lived in the same homes.
Now is that appeasement to mollycoddle badly behaved students or an attempt to support students who were struggling with their home situations?
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
rugasaw
Shipmate
# 7315
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
All I said was that for students who are poor readers there was one single treatment.
Speaking as a poor reader. I would think that for those who have Irlen's syndrome there might be treatments that has nothing to do with good teaching per say. I don't know if you consider this physical or what but I assure you it does exist and that something as simple as use of colored paper, tinted overlays, or tinted glasses can do wonders. I don't know if your SEN deals with Irlen's syndrome or not. I don't even know if you would consider it a physical disability or not. But it does cause people difficulty in reading.
***Personal anecdote alert***
I was diagnosed in elementary school with dyslexia. I was over diagnosed and put into a special ed. class that was way under my ability level(the next year I was diagnosed the other direction and placed in a gifted and talented class). I have had teachers fawn over me and teachers who thought I was stupid(I'm talented that way). I have since been informed that most dyslexics have Irlen's syndrome. Just this week I was looking at a difficult to read form in the coaching offices. On the way out to the field I looked at the form again with my blue shaded sunglasses on and found the same difficult to read form clear and much easier.
--------------------
Treat the earth well, It was not given to you by your parents. It was loaned to you by your children. -Unknown
Posts: 2716 | From: Houston | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gurdur
Shipmate
# 857
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
I heard the other day of someone (now probably in his 50s) who wasn't diagnosed as being deaf until he was in secondary school.
Carys
This used to happen far more often than you would think - deaf or hearing-disabled children were often not diagnosed as such in primary schools, and treated as simply slow-learners.
Deafness in only one ear - say just the usual 60dB hearing-loss resulting from a perforated ear-drum (resulting from glue-ear, chronic middle-ear infection) - is quite enough to handicap a child in school very severely, and it can go undiagnosed very long, typically till sometime in secondary school.
Posts: 380 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
posted by PhilA
quote:
One of the effects of giving a child a label is that it gives the school an excuse as to why the kid fails. Also, with a large SEN register comes a larger budget, and a more understanding OFSTED if little Billy pulls a blinder and sticks his bum out of the window.
According to Zoe Williams, writing in the Guardian diagnosing children with special educational needs does not obtain additional funding for the school.
--------------------
"I fart in your general direction."
M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
I have been straining to stay away from this thread. I am now doomed.
I'm not a teacher, but a designer of services in an agency that helps, or at least claims to help, adults with multiple disabilities (physical, sensory, cognitive, and/or psychiatric) live allegedly "normal" lives in community settings.
My case load takes up where students with diagnosed disabilities "age out" of public (US) education at 21 years of age. My contact with the US equivalent of SEN (where I live it's called SPED)consists of meeting with the student, his/her family, and his/her "team" (the assemblage of specialists, therapists, educators, etc. who work with the student through the school district) beginning when s/he is referred to us four-to-six months before s/he "transitions" into adult services. Experience has taught me to request substantial observation time in the classrooms of referred "transitioning" students.
People actually eligible for adult disabilities services where I live are not folks with wide variations in aptitudes, or uneven maturation rates, or atypical learning styles. I am not trivializing these situations, which can cause immense complications in living for those who have them; I am simply pointing out that someone with a condition like dyslexia has a different set of frustrations, obstacles, and difficulties to contend with than someone who is, say, profoundly deaf, moderately retarded, and uses a wheelchair. We are talking here about people anyone would immediately recognize as clearly and significantly disabled.
While I suspect that this is not what oldandrew means by "mixed ability" classrooms, my observation time in various public high schools in my state leads me to conclude that my state's current methods for dealing with children who have disabilities AND "learning difficulties" is a complete and utter unworkable crock.
Here's why:
1. "Mainstreaming," so-called: this is the practice of placing students with mild, moderate, and profound disabilities of all kinds together in the classroom with so-called "typical" students.
The theory, as I understand it, is that since children with disabilities suffer from social isolation from their peers (and resultant outright discrimination in adulthood) when segregated into separate SPED classrooms, they will do better academically as well as socially if surrounded by "typical" children who are unwittingly recruited as role models for them. (Why it never seems to occur to anyone that possibly the "typical" children and their parents might prefer to be offered some choice in this matter I can't say.) "Typical" children are meant to benefit from this arrangement by becoming some sort of "peer teachers," which allegedly reinforces their own learning. Also, they benefit by becoming more accepting of and compassionate toward their disabled peers.
The last "mainstreamed" classroom I visited, about 4 months ago, was a zoo. There were 34 students in a high school physics class. Two students were using wheelchairs at lab "benches" they could barely reach, as none had been made handicap-accessible for them. (There were, in fact, benches for only 24 students; several students just stood around gawping.)
Another student (mostly) sat with an aide in the back of the room with crayons and a coloring book; the aide was attempting to get this student to focus on and respond to the word "red" by getting him to pick up a red crayon to use on the coloring book, which I guess is a form of physics if you happen to have a low IQ plus autism; this was my referral.
A fourth student was wandering aimlessly and clumsily around the classroom, bumping into benches and other students, shaking his head and flapping his hands and occasionally making high-pitched sounds that might have been words; I couldn't tell.
The remaining students, under the direction of the physics teacher, were attempting, despite numerous interruptions and distractions from the wandering student as well as from my guy with the crayons (who would get up periodically and lunge around trying to get away from his aide) to master a lesson having something to do with gasses and pressure.
I was a pretty good student through secondary, post-secondary, and graduate schools, though I took biology and chemistry rather than physics in high school. When the lesson was over, I could not have told you a thing about those gas pressures. Admittedly, I was more focused on young Mr. Red Crayon than the lesson, but still . . .
I stayed right through the passing bell, to see which "typical" students came around to have their learning reinforced by explaining gas pressure to Mr. Red Crayon, or to socialize with or be compassionate toward him. You may have three guesses about the number of students who came back to assist this young man to his next class; the first two guesses do not count.
It's possible that mixed-ability classes achieve more success than this mainstreamed class did; I wouldn't know. I only know that this situation is pretty typical of all the mainstreamed classes I have visited in the last five years, and it's a disaster. As far as I can see, this situation does no social, academic, or any other kind of good at all for anyone concerned.
2. "Normalization," so-called: When I first entered this field (rather longer ago than my five years' history with my current position), the goal was to get people out of institutions. I still support this goal; institutionalizing people with significant disabilities (or anybody else, as far as I can see) doesn't seem to do them much good. Insofar as a human being is able to make meaningful distinctions and choices, said human being should be encouraged to express and exercise such preferences as s/he has, so long as these aren't illegal and don't interfere with other people's rights and liberties. A human being should be entitled to a reasonable standard of living, as much personal liberty as s/he can manage without endangering self or others, and some measure of ordinary dignity, privacy, and respect. I have observed institutional life at close quarters while "springing" people from same, and rights, liberties, dignity et al. tend to run thin on the ground when you have to operate on the basis of low-bid contracts and economies of scale.
There is, however, such a thing as going to the opposite extreme. Nowadays, we expect people who have trouble remembering to shower or eat to maintain themselves, sometimes with a roommate, sometimes not, in their own (subsidized) apartments. We expect people unable to count, read, or tell time to secure and maintain part-time jobs to supplement their disability payments. The result is the creation of a whole industry (in which I am myself employed) which operates as a kind of disability theater. The world is the "set," the people with disabilities the actors, and behind the scenes are all these stage managers and stage hands, making sure the "actors" shower and dress, eat breakfast, wash up the dishes, and wait for the right bus at the right time to get to "work." At "work" -- that is, at supported employment -- another staff person, paid by an agency like mine, does the actual folding or sweeping or cleaning or what-have-you, while the "actor" looks on, bored and bewildered, but collects a paycheck from the actual employer. The another staff person drives the "actor" home (or makes sure he takes the right bus) and makes sure the "actor" puts together some sort of supper and does the laundry and remembers to go to bed.
You can call it "normalization" all you want; there is NOTHING normal about any of this. It's a whacking huge pretense. It's complicated, cumbersome, and expensive. It keeps a fair number of poorly-educated or recently-arrived-to-this-country people like my staffers employed, and it fills up the time of people who are sufficiently disabled to have trouble filling their time on their own. But what on earth is this all in aid of? Who is it for? What useful end is accomplished by it? Once upon a time, people like my clients -- and for that matter, like my staffers -- would find piece work to do, or jobs on assembly lines. Lowly as such work might be regarded, it was honest work; it generally actually produced something somebody somewhere actually wanted. Work like that is almost nonexistent now. So instead we have all this pretended busy-box make-work playacting which does nothing but fill time and offer the illusion, and I do mean illusion, of a useful, necessary place in the social order.
3. Entitlement: and here is a huge problem.
When this country first enacted the federal act which guaranteed a free, appropriate public education to every child, did anyone imagine that it would place Mr. Red Crayon in a high school physics class?
I don't think I'm being pessimistic in predicting that Mr. Crayon will not learn any physics. He does not read. He makes sounds but so far I have not heard him utter anything I would describe as language. (His parents claim he has a vocabulary of about 10 words. They love him, they are his parents, they want the best for him, and I respect that. But I spent some 20 hours in Mr. Crayon's company in a variety of settings, including one-on-one, and the parents are deluded in believing he has 10 words.) If he can count, he's keeping that to himself. I am by no means certain that he knows his own name. I respect this individual's personal and human rights, and I wish him well, but . . . what the HELL is this guy doing in a HIGH SCHOOL PHYSICS CLASS?
Shall I tell you? Do you really want to know? Because his highly-educated but sadly-hoodwinked parents PLAN TO SEND HIM TO COLLEGE.
Yes.
They have been entitled, through the federal IDEA, to receive services for their son since he was diagnosed, and their plan is to enroll him in the local community college. I hope they understand that they will be footing this bill themselves, but I'm not at all sure they do. Their son will qualify for adult services, but this is a pretty bare-bones prospect compared to what they've been getting; I've been given a budget of 8 hours per week of services for him; he's been getting the equivalent of 40 hours a week under the law from his school district. Those parents are going to claw, scream, and kick for everything they can get.
Moreover, so are the approximately 20 other sets of parents who are also applying for adult services for their sons and daughters, and who will NOT be getting any such services, based on my observations of them.
These are the young men and women who have genuine issues which are not severe enough to qualify for help. These are ALSO young people who have been diagnosed with assorted nebulosities like "non-specific learning disability," a condition which I personally, after considerable experience, translate variously as "child with normal case of adolescent rebellion," "child with lots of energy forced to sit still all day," "child with wacko parents," "child with incompetent or can't-be-bothered parents," or "child who was apparently just born mean and nasty."
Bottom Line: A system which empowers and authorizes the party of the first part to demand the moon, but forces the party of the second part to pay for it, is never going to work. Moreover, a system of education in which one group of students is meant to meet certain group standards while a second set of students is expected to meet individually-designed standards, can only be made to work is you keep the two groups separate.
Harrison Bergeron would be proud.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
infinite_monkey
Shipmate
# 11333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Apocalypso:
The theory, as I understand it, is that since children with disabilities suffer from social isolation from their peers (and resultant outright discrimination in adulthood) when segregated into separate SPED classrooms, they will do better academically as well as socially if surrounded by "typical" children who are unwittingly recruited as role models for them. (Why it never seems to occur to anyone that possibly the "typical" children and their parents might prefer to be offered some choice in this matter I can't say.) ...
The last "mainstreamed" classroom I visited, about 4 months ago, was a zoo...
Moreover, a system of education in which one group of students is meant to meet certain group standards while a second set of students is expected to meet individually-designed standards, can only be made to work is you keep the two groups separate.
Apocalypso, I coordinate an elementary school program which serves students with moderate to severe disabilities (including many junior versions of your Mr. Crayon)in general education classrooms, and my experience of the successes and benefits of inclusive school communities is almost diametrically opposed to yours.
One of my students has severe physical, communicative, and cognitive disabilities--she says more than 10 words, but 80% of them are incomprehensible, and she's operating more or less at a 2-4 year old level. Far from being an "actor" in a role that shouldn't belong to her, she's a central member of her fourth grade classroom community, and her presence enriches her classmates' experience.
Yesterday, her class was reviewing place value concepts to the hundred millions, using a game they played in pairs with number tiles. In advance, the classroom teacher notified inclusion staff of which general education student was struggling the most with the concept: he paired with my student and received 10 minutes of intense 2-on-1 intervention because I worked with him on identifying each place value while my student practiced fine motor skills by lifting and matching the tiles. Today, during writer's workshop, my student worked with a child who is vastly above level--she'd already done all the assignments and chose to do an adapted story with my student because she wanted something more interesting than reading silently while the others finished.
Parents and children at my school aren't initially offered choice in the matter, it's true. But teachers are--and without exception, they choose to have inclusion students, because they've seen the benefits. Having another adult supporting the inclusion students means more chances to do small group and individual instruction: adaptations we use with our IEP students are often helpful for other kids challenged in similar ways. For the half of our classrooms with exceptional students, we are clear with all families that inclusion is a part of their child's classroom: I honestly can't think of a single parent request to transfer out of a class with inclusion kids in it.
I'm not an extremist when it comes to inclusive schooling: I've worked with kids who I feel would be poorly served in general education classrooms, and I've seen instances when adequate supports weren't in place. But, reading your description of the high school class you visited, I wanted to share another example: given supportive partner teachers and adequate resources, mixed-ability and inclusive teaching can and does work.
[ 18. September 2010, 06:33: Message edited by: infinite_monkey ]
--------------------
His light was lifted just above the Law,
And now we have to live with what we did with what we saw.
--Dar Williams, And a God Descended
Obligatory Blog Flog: www.otherteacher.wordpress.com
Posts: 1423 | From: left coast united states | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Was referred to this thread to read Apocalypso's post. ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Actually, the red herring is your consistent strawman that anyone here has claimed that SEN deals with physical disabilities. What has been said, several times, is that assessments should include screening for sensory impairments.
Which is, of course, completely irrelevant to the discussion of the SEN system, unless we pretend that the SEN system is focused on physical disabilities.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
All I said was that for students who are poor readers there was one single treatment.
Which is?
Teaching them well.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
