Return to FAT City - Part III

The following are some good points that Lavoie raised:

• Kinetic melodies.  Muscle memory is how I know this term.  Some children who suffer from learning disabilities (LD's) lack this.  When I brush my teeth, I don't have to think about what I'm doing.  I have done it for so long, that my body knows what to do.  I am able to multitask.  The children who suffer from LD's have to focus on what they're doing, and they're less able to multitask.  They are sometimes easily distracted as well.  To be so easily distracted and unable to perform two tasks at once would be incredibly challenging and frustrating.  
• "A family on a waterbed".  When a child in a family has an LD, the entire family is directly effected.  It's as if they're on a waterbed together.  The effects are felt by all, and this is often very challenging.  These families are in crisis, and they rarely respond the way that you'd want them to.  When this happens, it is important that you take their responses seriously, and not personally. 
• "When elephants fight, it's the grass that gets trampled".  Unfortunately, I am familiar with this as well.  There's a young man in my life whose parents have been going through a brutal divorce for the past 3 years.  He is under the age to make his own decisions, and his parents have been fighting tooth and nail over him.  They both say that they want what's best for him, and on the part of the father, I believe him.  She, on the other hand, is still hurting and acting out of spite.  She refuses the father access to his son, which she is saying is the best for the boy.  A son needs to see his father.  It's as simple as that.  She is operating under the guise of protection, but she is causing great harm.  Side note: I hate divorce.
• Self esteem is built by regular educators.  When a child with an LD is in a separate classroom with separate teachers, the praise of those specialized teachers means little to them.  Those teachers are supposed to praise and encourage them.  If a child's self esteem is to be boosted, they must be praised by a regular classroom teacher.  Makes sense!
• "The only person who succeeds in competition is the one who knows there is a chance of winning".  Holy smokes, this brings me back to my childhood.  I disliked competition and if it was in a sport, I hated it.  I had few sport-related skills, and I always felt like I was going to lose.  I remember one time at summer camp, the whole camp was split into 4 teams, who would compete against one another every waking moment.  The sense of dread when I discovered this was crushing.  But if it was a competition in academics, I was ready for it.  I performed well in school, and I knew that I had a shot.  This still holds true for me today.  At retreat, for example, I was ready to give up on the dock for the ridiculous monster game.  We were supposed to get 10 people from the end of the dock to the shore by using only 3 points of contact.  I looked at the cold lake, and the team mates that I knew I would have to snuggle up to, and I was ready to throw in the towel.  We eventually talked them down, though, and we succeeded in the end.   
• The story of the king with the shiny stone.  A young boy dropped his stone and gashed the front.  It was unfixable, and the king was utterly disappointed.  He took it to some wise men who took the stone and started carving the stone.  When these wise men were finished, they had transformed the once ugly gash, into a beautiful rose.  This is the role of the teacher with a child with an LD.  There is a "gash", if you will, in this child.  They often see it as a horrible problem.  It's the thing that sets them apart from their peers, and because of that, they hate it.  It's up to the teacher to show the child that it doesn't have to be a negative part of their lives.  They take the "ugly gash", and turn it into something beautiful.  

October 4th, 2011

We continued watching William Ury's video today.  What follows are a few more points that I gathered from it:

• The secret to peace is us.  I found this point both interesting and convicting.  There is a certain person in my life right now, who causes me incredible amounts of grief.  I am often in conflict with this person, and my tactic recently has been avoidance.  I don't see this person, and I have found incredible peace in that.  However, I know that avoiding a situation doesn't correct it.  I know there are things that I could do to make peace, but I simply have no desire.  The past few months have been good for me.  I've found myself 'going to the balcony' and I feel like I understand better where this person is coming from.  This time has been valuable to me, but I know that I can't avoid it forever.  I have a role to play in making peace.  I just have to muster the nerve.
• When you're involved in conflict, you often lose focus.  I understand this well.  As I have mentioned in previous blogs, I have found myself in many terrifying conversations over the past few years.  When I am in the midst of said conversations, I certainly do lose focus.  I think about the conversation later, and I think of everything that I should have said.  I then spot the numerable flaws in the other parties arguments, and I think, "why couldn't I see it then!  We might have one this one."  My mind turns to mush when I'm being verbally attacked by a group of angry people.  Maybe that's normal, though.  
• When you're angry, you'll make the best speech you'll ever regret.  I wish I had nothing to say on this point, but I unfortunately know this feeling.  In the heat of an argument, I have definitely said the wrong things.  I am reminded of an argument I had on the school bus in grade 8.  Meghan was a rather irritating girl in my class.  She was explaining that it's bad for you to wear undergarments whilst you sleep because your body needs to breath.  Because cotton is such a stifling fabric.  Ridiculous!  Seeing the many flaws in that statement, I challenged her.  I ended that conversation with, "well at least I have friends!"  Childish, I know.  I shouldn't have said that to her, whether it was true or not.

During Ury's talk, I remembered back to my high school days.  Each day after school, I would come home to watch Dr. Phil.  I watched many episodes, but only one episode stands out in my memory now.  He was speaking to a young girl who had a very angry father.  Pr. Phil explained to this girl that anger is only ever used as a mask.  I remember the impact that statement had on me.  It made so much sense!  My father had quite the temper while I was growing up.  He owned his own business and the stress of that had quite an effect on him.  Thankfully, he later sold his business, and then became wonderfully jolly.  I learned from Dr. Phil to look past the anger and try to understand what's causing it.  Then you can focus your attention on that and try and solve the problem.  This is something that I need to do more with this person in my life.  However, she is a great deal older than myself.  I don't think that I'll be able to diagnose her anger issues well, because I haven't known her for very long.  I still need to try and look past the anger, though, and try not to take what she says personally.  

Beyond FAT City - Part II

The following are a few more things that I found particularly interesting:

• Lavoie shared a story about him in his early teaching career with a student who had trouble with writing.  This student was given an assignment, and he was to write about his dog.  This young man stayed in to do his homework while his friends played basketball.  He was wonderfully proud of his work.  Lavoie marked the work and handed it back to him.  The boy hadn't done well.  He started to cry, and Lavoie tried to console him by saying, "I know how you feel."  The boys response was "the devil you do!"  Those who have done well in school and enjoyed it have no idea what a child with a learning disability goes through.  I feel like I can be especially sympathetic towards people who are struggling.  I could see myself saying this to a student someday, and I'm glad that I know how they might respond.  After thinking about it more, I realized that I really don't know anything about struggling in school.  I have very few memories of being confused during lessons.  I was always able to receive assistance and sort it out.  Praise the Lord, for my academic abilities.  
• The next point resonated with me.  I had never heard it before, and I'm positive that I'll never forget it.  Lavoie said that if you wouldn't do it to an adult, don't do it to a kid.  I couldn't agree with this more.  I remember in grade 6, there was a young fellow named Shawn.  We were asked to colour a title page, or something, for our science class.   Shawn didn't complete his homework, and he was to write a letter to the teacher explaining why.  Shawn wrote on his paper, "I forgot my colours".  This foolish teacher, who I didn't like a bit, laughed and then read his letter to the class.  What a humiliating class for Shawn.  What he needed was help, not to be ridiculed.  That teacher, hopefully, wouldn't treat an adult in such a way, and she certainly shouldn't have treated a child that way.  I hope to have grace when kids arrive late or don't complete an assignment.  I hope to establish mutual respect in my classroom, and treating my students with respect is the way to begin.
• If they're looking for attention, give it to them!  On observation, there was a young lady who was desperate for the attention and assistance of the student teacher.  She would ask for help continually, even though she knew what to do.  I noticed that teachers became frustrated with her for this.  I took to observing her more closely, and I noticed that she never brought a lunch to school.  Thankfully, this school had a hot lunch program in effect, so she had a lunch every day.  I couldn't help but think about her parents, and how busy they seemed to be.  If they didn't have time to make their daughter a lunch, did they have time to help her with her homework or ask her about her day?  I certainly hope that I'm wrong in my speculation.  I think she just wanted attention, and I look forward to giving her some.  
• Kids would rather seem bad than dumb.  If a student doesn't understand a topic, they may act out to save face.  Kids don't like to be embarrassed, so if they're put on the spot, they may do silly things to protect their image.  When I was young, I remember feeling this way.  I never acted out in class, but I remember being afraid of people thinking I was dumb.  If I had a question about a topic that everyone else seemed to understand well, I wouldn't ask any questions.  If there was a math function that I had forgotten about, I wouldn't ask the teacher for assistance.  I remember once in grade two (or something), I sat at my desk and cried because I couldn't remember how to divide.  I didn't want to ask the teacher for help, but she noticed I was crying and came to my aid. 
• Lavoie explained the difference between remedial and compensatory education:
• Remedial:  the focus is to bring the student back up to the appropriate level. 
• Compensatory:  when the curriculum and materials are brought down to the level of the student.  While this can help a student succeed for a while, they won't be succeeding when they are released from school and find that they can't read.  There must be a balance between remedial and compensatory education.  They work wonderfully well together.
• Revisualization was something that I'd never heard of before.  Often children who are poor spellers have problems with revisualization.  These kids may also have a hard time cleaning their room.  They are unable to remember and visualize what their room looked like when it was clean, so they don't know what to do.  The incredible analogy that Lavoie used was of a puzzle.  He said that if he gave a 500 piece puzzle to a few adults and asked them to complete it, that they could do it.  Then he said that if he increased the size of the puzzle, to 5000 pieces, and then removed the box, it would be impossible for the same adults to complete.  If there is no image of a finished product, then you can't demand they get it.  Sometimes they are genuinely unable.  
• "Give kids roots and wings".  Lavoie was saying that as parents, you need to give a child somewhere to send their roots down.  They need to feel loved, nurtured and safe there.  They need to be able to learn from their mistakes and grow.  He explained that they also need to be able to function on their own.  One day when they grow up, you, as a parent, would like to see them succeed.  If all you've done is set up boundaries for them and monitored them, they won't be ready for the world.  In my EDPS 310 class, I was reading about chronic misbehaviors in the classroom.  The text explained that the main goal of the teacher is to enable the students to control their own behavior.  If you don't teach them that, then you're setting them up to fail in the real world.  

September 28th, 2011

We looked at a case study in class today entitled "Commitments".  In this situation, there was a young man named Shawn who tended to burst out inappropriately in class.  I feel that in this situation the teacher acted inappropriately and with astounding inconsistency.  She came to the class and asked them for advice on how to deal with Shawn's problem, as she called it.  Students yelled out inappropriate things, such as "Shawn's a pain in the butt", and she said and did nothing.  In fact, she agreed with some of them.  In doing this, she is stating to the students that she is on their side against Shawn, which she later displays quite obviously.  After gathering a few more opinions from the other students, the teacher decides that the next day in class she will give each student an assignment.  Their task is to select three personal goals to improve, and then the class would discuss each others goals.  She asked if someone would speak up when it came time for Shawn to read out his goals.  HORRIBLE IDEA!  Shawn doesn't respond well to the suggestions of the other students.  She is setting him up to fail.

The next day, she hands out the assignments and explains it the the class.  Shawn was confused at her explanation, so she walked up to him and said, "one of your commitments could be to try to control yourself from making inappropriate remarks to other students or refrain from poking or kicking them."  I'm not sure that she could have handled that situation any worse.  A personal conference would have worked infinitely better.  Shawn wouldn't feel embarrassed, and she could possibly listen to him and understand him.  When it was his turn to share his commitments to the class, he stood up and read them aloud.  His second promise was to "try to control [his] mouth".  Then a student made a snide remark.  Shawn blurted out, as I would've expected, and then quickly puts his hand over his mouth.  The teachers reaction towards the student who made the rude remark: NOTHING!  The teacher is placing every scrap of blame on this troubled young man.  I don't believe that there is such a thing as a conflict with only one party that is to blame.  Both sides inevitably do something wrong, and that needs to be recognized in order for resolution to be possible.  I have been in many an altercation where I was told that the fault was all mine, and these sorts of conversations NEVER go well.  This teacher should have suggested to the other students a goal: "I won't push Shawn's buttons".  These students aren't innocent, and they also need to change to make peace in the classroom.

I will list the inconsistencies of this teacher below:

• When Shawn would burst out, she would discipline him.  When other students would burst out, she would do nothing.
• She suggested ideas to Shawn for his assignment, and didn't for the other students.
• When Shawn reacted poorly to the taunting and teasing of the students, she would punish him.  She wouldn't punish the students that were doing the taunting, which I think is completely illogical.  To illustrate my point, I will use an analogy.  Let's say there is a bear that a person is standing near.  When this person grabs a stick and pokes the bear, they know what will happen.  This person is viciously attacked by the bear.  Who is at fault in this situation?  The person knew very well what the consequences of their actions would be, and still made that decision.  The bear simply reacted, and in a perfectly natural way. (Correct answer: you should punish the idiot person).

Later that class, we watched an informative video by William Ury.  It was about negotiation, and unfortunately, I found a great deal of what he said to be true.  I say unfortunately, because I have been in many tough conversations with a particular group of people, over the past two years.  Each gathering with this group would end horribly, with myself and my husband finding ourselves at the center of a shit hurricane.  There is one person in this group who is completely blameless in every area of her life.  When we do something she doesn't approve of, we are labelled as betrayers, and the rest of this group blindly supports her.  Things happen, she tells her side of the story to them, and that's all they need!  They don't care about our side of what happened, and they don't want to hear about it.  They just want us to apologize, take complete responsibility for what's happened, and then pretend like everything is fine.  We have had many conversations with this entire group, because that is the only way that they'll bring anything up.  This person doesn't like to talk to anyone she is upset with.  She waits until she is surrounded by supportive people, and then they all strike at once.  It's just lovely...  When I was watching this movie, I was reminded of this situation.  Ury says that there are usually two ways that conversations in negotiations go.  The opposing parties can face each other and argue, or they can stand beside one another, and look to a common goal.  When they face each other and argue, little is accomplished.  This arguing is usually done with an emotional base, and things get out of hand rapidly.  These are the types of arguments that we have with this group.  The other type of conversation happens when the two parties focus their attention on a common goal, not on the opposing party.  Ury calls this 'going to the balcony'.  The parties take a step back from their emotions, and try and see things from a different perspective.  This type of conversation is logical, and through such conversations, much can be accomplished.  I have yet to see a conversation like this with that group.  I'd like to sit that entire group down and make them watch this video.  

Beyond FAT City - Part I

We started watching Richard Lavoie's video today in class.  I had seen his video from the 80's, and was sad not to see the same amusing garb and hairstyles of the guests.  This video was made quite recently.  The format was different from the last as well.  The last FAT city video took place in a classroom, with a bunch of adults standing in the place of students.  Lavoie would hand out worksheets and try and get them to understand the way that so many teachers try and "help" students who have learning disabilities.  It was incredible to watch.  This new video was filmed as a seminar.  Lavoie was on a stage teaching.  There were several small group sessions that were thrown in there where we heard past experiences of people in his audience.  I found every second of this video wonderfully applicable and helpful.  What will follow are some points that I found particularly interesting.

• He told a story of a boy who went to the grocery store with his mother.  She asked him what he wanted to have for dinner and he said french fries.  She assigned him with a job, and that was to find and bring back some potatoes.  He was confused by this.  He had no idea that french fries were made of potatoes.  He made the point that even clean cut, 'smart' looking children can suffer from a learning disability.   I experienced something like this during my observation.  There was a young man in one of the classes that I had taught a few years before in KPED.  I struck up conversation with this fellow several times, and I was shocked at how well spoken he was.  He used words that were far beyond what I would have expected.  I was helping out in the class by assisting the students fill in a worksheet.  I looked at his written work, and I was shocked.  His writing was very far behind the writing of the other students.
• He explained the difference between a child with no attention span and a child who is easily distracted.  Often these two labels are used interchangeably, but they mean the opposite.  The child with no attention span pays attention to nothing, while the child who is distractible pays attention to everything.  
• Lavoie also listed three reasons why adolescence sucks, which are as follows:
• In high school, you are expected to be good at everything.  Teachers are disappointed in you and try to push you to be better in any subject where they feel you aren't making the cut.  This is completely unrealistic.  In life after school, you have a few areas where you've refined your skills.  You're not expected to be good at everything.
• It's the only time in life where being different is automatically bad.  I definitely felt this when I was in elementary school.  I did my very best to hide my strangeness from my friends.  For a few years there, I had a halloween tradition.  I would take a pumpkin, of a smallish size, and I would cover it with tinfoil.  I would then cut out holes in the foil in the shape of eyes.  I would take my moms art supplies and paint eyes on the silver pumpkin.  I would then carve out a hole in the lower stem of the pumpkin and lace a rope through it.  I would run out to one of the trees that was closest to the road and hang the pumpkin from a branch.  I remember standing back, and feeling such a sense of pride.  I had made that pumpkin!  It was only this year that I looked back on that memory and realized how incredibly strange it was.  I never told anyone at school about this because I feared their judgement.  
• There is recognition of permanence.  There typically comes a point in this stage, where an adolescent looks into the mirror, and realizes, "that's it!"  They think that this is what they'll be like for the rest of their lives.  This is a wonderful realization if you're happy with yourself, but terrible if you're not.  I've heard the middle years described by many people as the worst years of their lives.  I hope that they didn't look in the mirror and feel this way.  Thankfully, life does change a lot from that point.

September 22nd

Today we watched a very interesting video in class called 'how great leaders inspire action', by Simon Sinek.  I looked forward to this video, knowing that any good teacher is one that inspires action and learning in students.  Although, I was slightly troubled when my instructor turned out the lights. I couldn't see at all, and there were so many things I wanted to write down!  Here are some of the things that I particularly enjoyed from his TED talk:

This is the illustration that Sinek used.  What Sinek was saying was that most people think from the outside in.  They figure out the 'what', the 'how', and then finally the 'why'.  Sinek argued that inspired people think from the inside out.  They start with the 'why', and everything else falls into place.  The 'how' and the 'what' become simpler, or are at least provided with more direction.  

          I found this point to be particularly interesting.  As has been discussed in previous blogs, I am a crocheter.  There is little I enjoy more than sitting down with a lovely ball of yarn and a good idea.  I find myself continually designing things in my mind.  I see a need for something, and I think about how I could fill that need with some yarn and determination.  Typically, these projects are finished quickly.  

What?:  I will make something.

How?:  I will crochet the structure using my previously acquired skills.

Why?:  there is an immediate and direct need.

The 'why' is sitting right in front of me, and the project is done before I know it.  There are also times when I just think of things to make right out of the blue.  I don't fully know where these little inspirations come from, but I do enjoy them.  I've also got a few projects on the go that I was interested in to keep me busy, but then I lost my desire.

What?: I was making something.

How?:  I was crocheting it.

Why?:  No reason in particular.

I have many a project, sitting in a heap near my buckets full of yarn, that have come to a halt.  The reason that they have stopped, is because I either didn't have, or lost track of my 'why'.  When there is no obvious reason, the production slows and eventually ceases.  I feel that the same will go for students.  I can tell them what to do and teach them how to do it, but until they understand the 'why', they will not become inspired to finish the task on their own.  They will need continual encouragement.  

   Another example is that of my younger self.  When I was young, I was never told to clean my room.  My parents had five children, I was number four, and they had enough things occupying them that the state of my room was insignificant.  I would look at it sometimes.  I knew it was dirty.  I knew what I had to do.  I knew how to do it, but I just couldn't understand the why.  Because of this conundrum, I rarely cleaned my room.  Also when I was young, I would look at my bedroom door sometimes and think to myself, "something must be done about this door".  I still remember the wave of inspiration that came over me.  I was going to cover that unsightly door with candy wrappers.  I had an overpowering 'why'.  The door was ugly, and candy wrappers were, and still are, beautiful!  It was a logical sequence of thought for me.  It took me a little while, but I eventually collected enough candy wrappers to carefully cut them out, and tape them to my door.  I never had to talk myself into working on this project.  I loved working on it, because I saw the reason behind it.  It made sense to me.

• Don't tell people what, but tell them why.

If you have a pack of robots following you, all you have to do is tell them what to do.  They won't understand any reason why.  They are machines.  They will do exactly what you tell them to do, and the product you had in mind will be achieved exactly.  If you have a pack of children following you, all you need to do is explain the reason you would like something to be done.  They hopefully will be as inspired as you by this objective, and then you just sit back.  People that are inspired require less leadership.  They have the goal in sight, and they each have a unique way of getting to it.  The beauty of people is that they can surprise you.  I have been taken aback more than once by an amazing thing a child has done when I gave them a set of simple instructions.  Let them be creative and try things out for themselves.  

September 13th, 2011

A class on inclusive education:  I realized how much I need this when I struggled with the introductory activity.  A simple question: list three things you know about inclusive education.  My answers:
- it's coming
- it's difficult
- (an answer supplied by another student) it has the potential have a huge impact on kids and society.

I know next to nothing about inclusive education, and I know that if I want to be a successful teacher, I'll need to know it inside and out.  It should be a very fruitful semester!

We watched a very informative video today.  Although I found the filming of it to be bland, and some of the scenarios awkwardly staged, I learned from it.
     We were introduced to four children who all had learning disabilities.  It was very interesting to see how their needs were handled.  The first boy, Henry, had trouble reading. He had ADD and his solution came in the form of his dedicated and loving grandmother.  She spent time with him at home and worked with him one on one.  One little girl was placed into a special education class.  It was very interesting to see how the children in that class interacted with one another.  They were kind, and helped  each other out.  This little girl was a gifted reader and singer.  It was great to see the kids who struggled in one area, excel in another.  This little girl was great at singing, and Henry was gifted in chess and math.  Often times, this is the case.  These kids aren't stupid;  their minds just function very differently.  They need to be taught in very different ways.
     One boy in the film named Max had ADHD.  The solution, if I can even call it that, for him was ritalin.  During this point in the film I was reminded of a film we watched last semester in ed. psych.  It was a TED talk by Sir Ken Robinson.  He referred to Gillian Lynne.  She was a young girl growing up in England, and she struggled in school.  She was unable to listen, she would fidget, and she had trouble completing work.  A modern day doctor would diagnose her with ADHD and put her on medication in an attempt to make her act like everyone else.  Thankfully, ADHD didn't exist in the 1930's, and neither did ritalin.  Her mother was seeking a solution to her daughter's school troubles and visited a doctor.  After the doctor heard everything that Lynne's mother said, the doctor told her he needed to speak to her mother privately.  They left the room and he switched on the radio.  As soon as they left the room, Lynne was on her feet dancing to the music.  The doctor informed Lynne's mother that Lynne was a dancer and not learning disabled.  Lynne was placed in a school of dance, and she flourished there.  She was in the royal ballet, and became a choreographer doing work for such productions as 'Cats' and the 'Phantom of the Opera'.  The things that set her apart from her classmates were what later distinguished her.  The things that we are so desperately trying to correct in our children, are the things that will make them great.  We're trying to punch all kids through the same sized hole, and our society will suffer because of this.