Educators and the "inclusive" classroom...

Post Reply New Topic

Last night I attended a workshop for educators on classroom inclusiveness for children with autism. (I have HFA/ Asperger's and was curious to see how much had changed since the days when I was in public primary school and split my days between the advanced readers group, the special ed room, and the library--oh, and maybe an hour in my actual classroom.) The speaker had lots of information and research to relay (in fact, she had to skim over several slides to stay on time), and was herself very knowledgeable.

However: I was struck by a few interesting details:

1) Although the speaker noted that visuals were essential to students with ASDs, there were only three or four images in the entire powerpoint, and the really informative one--the one on mind mapping which was under the heading "Consider the Child's Perspective", was skimmed over without any explanation about the function of the image itself! The few other visuals were "fluff"--not memorable, and certainly irrelevant to aiding the viewer in an understanding of what was being said.

2) There were lots of distractions inside and outside the room. These were mostly beyond the speaker's control, but the speaker missed an incredible teaching opportunity by not pointing them out, as they were exactly the sorts of things educators need to minimize or eliminate when teaching students with ASDs: people constantly coming and going, shuffling and shifting; open doors letting in noise and activity from the adjacent hallway; the smell of food from the refreshments table, etc. (I was also distracted by a receipt which had fallen on the floor.) Since most people learn by example, why not convey what environment teachers need to create in the classroom by consciously attempting to create it within the presentation room? This would be more effective than the most comprehensive powerpoint. Having been in my young son's classroom, I can say emphatically that most educators would be surprised to learn what constitutes a distraction in their classrooms: flourescent lighting, lots of bright contrasting colors, stacks of activity bins, bits of crayon wrapper on the floor, the hum of computers and heaters, etc. I can't stand the place, and I find it difficult to back the teacher when a note comes home saying my son (possibly ADHD) has not been paying attention. Five minutes there and I am ready to crawl under a table!

It's not always possible to eliminate a source of distraction, but it is amazing to me that so many educators hardly seem aware of them to begin with--even if they see the list on paper, they don't make the connection to the things which are problematic in their own classrooms!

3) It was amusing to me that the initial presenter finished her presentation on autism by initiating a group activity (I do relish irony!).

Curious to know what others have observed on these topics, or what other challenges educators may have found in attempting to create an "inclusive" environment for children with ASDs.

Wow. Great observations.

We are considering moving my son to a private school that, to me, seems too quiet and austere compared to his colorful, bustling classroom. The private school has 8 kids per classroom, so roughly 1/3 of what he's dealing with now. I don't see him getting distracted by little things like you mention (though maybe I haven't noticed). I do find that when kids start talking, being silly, or getting animated, he's drawn to that movement/excitement, and he will happily join in. He tends to need reminders, and he's a bit sensory seeking at times, but I've seen many boys do this, so I don't think it's outside the range of normal. On the other hand, he has real friends! Who would have expected classroom talking/socializing distraction for an Aspie? Go figure.

On the other hand, I worry that a place that's too quiet, with too much 1:1 attention, has the potential to be socially stressful. Sometimes a kid needs to zone out and be invisible for a bit, and that's easier done in a larger group.

We are in a good school district, so I feel like the public schools are better equipped to evaluate and set up help via the IEP, but too often, it seems, something just gets lost in the execution. Public schools are just crowded, visually busy, bustling places. That's a huge hurdle for kids with AS especially, if the goal is to teach kids thinking skills of any kind (including social thinking).

I do wish that the schools would pull kids more for gifted instruction. There seems to be some differentiation in reading groups, but there is no advanced program in our district for anything else until 7th grade. Back when we were kids, it started in 3rd grade, and that meant smaller, quieter groups, which was great for all sorts of kids.

I'm not sure if this is a response you were hoping for, but I find it ridiculous that someone so incompetent is able to fill any position akin to those educators. I legitimately felt disgusted when I read your post as it reminds me of those psychologists/psychiatrists out there that dismiss any possible ASD diagnosis due to something as simple as making eye contact.

Incompetence!! !

_________________
Unapologetically, Norny.
-chronically drunk

Naturalist, I would bring these to the workshop organizers'/presenters' attention, if possible. But I would also be prepared to go very slowly. My experience with educators is that they insist on ownership of "what there is to know about [special population]" and are not really thrilled to have outsiders -- including outsiders who are part of that special population -- coming in and telling them their expertise is lacking.

My experience with this is mainly with teachers who deal with gifted students, but the culture is the culture. I know exactly what you mean, though, about the classrooms. And I think it's gotten a lot worse in the past couple of decades -- the rooms just have so much more *stuff*, and the open-plan movement stripped out a lot of noise insulation. And the rooms are more crowded, more kids per class, plus the advent of group everything. I think a lot of the teachers are desensitized to it. Actually, I bet that's true. When I go to local coffeehouses, if there's a loud table, invariably it's either law students or schoolteachers.

LupaLuna,

Sometimes I think it's easy to define our experience as "NT" or "AS" but, having spent 9 years now with an AS son, I am pretty sure that the line is much fuzzier than we all think.

I am NT, but I like being a little bit invisible in a crowd. I was an excellent student, but I think I am a slower social processer too. I just need more time to mull things over. I never liked small seminars because I don't like to be called out to answer a question that I haven't really had time to consider thoroughly and write about. I learned best without discussion. Still do.

Fascinating observations! This topic is great. I agree with the replies too, about the need of zoning out and that the teachers probably don't notice those distractions

1) Most people don't know how to use visuals to present information. This is worrying, because educators generally suck at making visuals for autistic students to learn from.

2) They don't understand about the distractions/sensory issues, even if they seem to know on paper.

3) Schools are too obsessed with group activities. I thank my lucky stars that I didn't have to do groupwork growing up.

Educators don't know much about how to educate students with ASD. Educators have told this to me. It woudl be good for some autistic adults with an interest in this area to work twogether with educators (or be educators themselves) to come up with practical ways to help educate autistic students.

Thanks everyone!These are great responses, and very helpful as I do intend to contact the presenters with some observations and suggestions. Yes, Norny, I was definitely put off by what I observed. I want to see more awareness about educating special needs children (not just ASDs) than currently exists in my area, so I want to encourage attempts to relay such information, but I also want such attempts to be effective and "eye-opening."

It is interesting to consider the public / private school question raised by mommaPDD, as well as the question of class size. I can offer a little perspective from my own experience, as my parents moved me from a public to a private school in the second grade. (I should note, though, that I am HF / Asperger's so my perspective will differ from children who are on other points in the spectrum)

In the public school, the classrooms were visually very "busy" with lots of distractions. They had no windows, and relied solely on nasty overhead fluorescent for lighting. The teachers in kindergarten and 1st grades had a difficult time keeping me challenged, as I could already read, so they opted for three solutions: 1) sending me to the library alone with a note to the librarian to send me back at an established time; 2) sending me to the fifth-grade advanced reading group, which was a small group of 6 kids (oh how the 5th grade brains hated me!); and 3) (for contrast?) sending me to the special-ed room (the principal said it would help teach me "compassion" and "patience"). When I did spend time with my actual class, there were about 20-24 other kids, but I don't recall actually working with them; I mostly recall a beanbag in the corner of the room where I would curl up and read, alone, or drawing horses on my Big Chief tablet when at my desk. (I do wonder whether my lack of memory about interactions was affected by my AS, though.)

So, to private school: this was a small, Catholic school, with both nuns and lay persons as teachers and administrators. The rooms were very neatly kept, with only a little decoration, mostly around the calendar or along the back wall of the classroom, where the teachers hung our best work. There were bookshelves at the back of each room, and a few materials which were used regularly, like headphones at the listening table; all the other teaching materials were kept in supply closets, so as not to be a distraction. If anyone dropped trash in the halls or the classroom, they were told immediately to pick it up and put it in the waste-bin, so there was very little in the way of incidental "stuff" to distract. Every room had a long row of windows letting in natural light to supplement the overheads. The class size was about the same as in public school, but we often broke into smaller groups among which the teacher would circulate. They encouraged peer teaching which I liked very much (I am always happy to be the authority on something!). There were very clear rules (also to my taste) and the teachers seemed very attentive to each student's strengths and interests. The schedule was very predictable, and any deviations from the norm were discussed in detail, in advance. Downside was, there was a lot of emphasis on sitting very still and not doodling and looking directly at the teacher, things I found very hard but suspect the other students did, too.

So, the difference for me between wasting time and actually learning and participating really came down to the priorities and attitude of the educators. In public school, the emphasis was on keeping everybody busy--the activity didn't matter so long as everyone was occupied (one first grade teacher even gave me the "punishment work" to do when I finished ahead of others). In the private school, there was an emphasis on structure and focus as a means of creating an environment conducive to learning. That, and the attentiveness to each child's needs, were the great benefits of the private school I attended. It was old-fashioned in many ways, and often utilized hand-me-down technology from other schools (all my papers made me a bit sick as they smelled of the mimeograph ink, and the geography instructor had to amend the wall maps as they were about 30 years old); but I don't recall that these things hampered our learning.

The main consideration, at least in my case, was less a matter of classroom size and resources and more about someone giving more than a passing thought to what I needed, in a classroom which was structured for one goal: learning as much as we could in the time we spent there.

That's interesting because I never had trouble with school as a kid, I liked it a lot.
of course that is only my experience for others it might have been hell. I wouldn't be useful in thinking what could improve for autistic kids because I didn't go through it. But it's an important mission, we have to value each student's talents (this is true for anyone, nt's too, I have serious trouble with traditional teaching)

As a high school teacher, I feel like I'm on a one-woman crusade to tell people that not everyone in the world has to work on a team, in a group, or whatever. The world also needs people who work alone. And there are plenty of people who are not going to be "taught" to work in groups through the magic of being forced to do so in a classroom. I love how it's all about "differentiation" but it has to be working with others.

As for professional development in general -- the presenter is probably just presenting information she read somewhere. There's usually little effort made to implement anything that is being talked about. If we taught classes the way we were "taught" during PD sessions, we'd all be fired on the spot. Or should be.