What has storytelling got to do with learning? Part 1

“You may have noticed that the books you really love are bound together by a secret thread. You know very well what is the common quality that makes you love them, though you cannot put it into words: but most of your friends do not see it at all, and often wonder why, liking this, you should also like that."

The Problem of Pain by C.S. Lewis

Lately I have been thinking a lot about how important storytelling is to the learning process, and perhaps because it is on my mind, I keep finding different variations of this theme everywhere.

I saw shades of it in this review of Malcolm Gladwell's new book, "David and Goliath," which argues that Gladwell ticks off academics because he is a storyteller rather than a scientist.  I see it in the controversy that erupted online over David Dobbs' Aeon article,  "Die, Selfish Gene, Die," which calls for re-examination of the "selfish gene story" as the primary way of imagining and explaining the current findings in evolutionary biology.  I saw it in the commentaries on the 50 year anniversaries of the deaths of C.S. Lewis and John F. Kennedy which discuss their importance through the lens of the narratives we have created about their lives and about their deaths since 1963.

I see it a lot in recent theories and practices coming out of psychology and neuroscience, such as:

• Cognitive Neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga explaining how our brain organizes memories into plausible stories in this three-and-a-half minute video, "Your Storytelling Brain" from Big Think.
• Psychiatrist and author, Dr. Dan Siegel, explaining how helping children to form a narrative about emotional events can calm them down by connecting both sides of the brain (kidsinthehouse).
• Dr. Daniel Kaheman describing how "our remembering self is a storyteller," and how this impacts our sense of happiness, in his TedTalk, The riddle of experience vs. memory

I'll come back and try to connect some of these themes and ideas in a later post. (Maybe I'll try to weave them into a narrative!)  But first, let me tell you about some storytelling that I've witnessed a little bit closer to home...

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

If you are looking for a good book to read over the holidays, you really should check out this new novel by my friend, Sharon Skretting.  Not sure if it is your style? You can try a few chapters for free and see if you like it.  I think you just might.  

But whether this story is your kind of thing or not, I think that you should pay attention to what Sharon was trying to do if you are interested in how people learn.  

You see, besides being a talented writer, Sharon is a veteran elementary school teacher, and a very good one.  She wrote this novel while teaching full-time, and she shared each of the chapters with her class as she was writing them.  I can assure you that the class absolutely ate it up!  Of course, her students learned a lot of skills and techniques for writing and a lot about the art of storytelling from their teacher's example and from participating in that process. That is quite an accomplishment.  But Sharon's goal was even more ambitious.   She also thought:

Sharon Skretting

"What if I were to write a novel that uses the curriculum as the plot and allows the students to use the story to connect the concepts they must learn?  Of course the story must  exciting and engaging literature first, but also curriculum centered."

It is no small feat to create a novel which stands on its own merits as an entertaining story but which also embeds curriculum outcomes and weaves them in naturally.  But if you get a chance to check out Sharon's Quest Teaching blog, you'll find that she wants to do even more than that.  She also wants to show you how to use her novel to teach those outcomes and how to create engaging quests for you students. You'll find that "Quest Teaching" is more than just a blog name or a "brand;" it is a unique pedagogical method.  And you will discover that she is passionate about spreading that method.

At the core of her Quest Teaching method is the idea that narratives create connections.  They help the reader to make connections with characters and concepts.  They help students to make connections with each other and with people and cultures around the world.  To reinforce these connections, Sharon uses diverse teaching strategies such as projects, group activities, technology, and arts integration, but it is the story that helps to tie it all together.

Of course, there is nothing new about using literature to teach concepts or about doing group work or using project-based teaching.  Sharon acknowledges the importance of using tried and true methodologies.  But there is something unique about the way this story was specifically created to weave those elements together, and there is something special about the way the novel gives a meaning or purpose to the learning by making it a "quest."  Sharon had tried to do that sort of thing in the past but could only take the idea so far without a book specifically written with that purpose in mind.  Since she couldn't find a novel that met that criteria, she decided to write it herself.  It has been such a success that she is already working on a sequel!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I learned something too, from talking to Sharon and watching her work through the process.  It was tough, at first, for her to explain to me what she was doing and why, but I could tell that she really needed to talk it through.  As the year, and the novel, progressed, so did her vision of what she was trying to accomplish.  I got to hear the "story" of her Quest Teaching philosophy develop alongside the creation of "The Jewel of Peru."  It may have been a different kind of  storytelling than the novel she was writing, but it was just as much about the formation of a coherent narrative.  And you know what?  I was captured by her enthusiasm and got caught up in that narrative.  That is why I had to share it here on my blog.  A good story can do that to you.

In case you are wondering, no - I haven't finished reading her novel yet.  I have lots of excuses: I have been busy; I wanted to wait until I had my (signed) paperback version; I already know how it ends (she had to run it past someone!); I had a blog post or two to finish.  You know the excuses.  But Christmas holidays are coming, and soon I'll have the time to sit down with a good book or two, and I know just which book to start with!

What does neuroscience have to do with classroom teaching?

Recently I was interviewed by a local t.v. personality on the topic of, "How a student's brain works." I am reluctant to mention it, because in the interview I was nervous and tongue-tied and gave vague, drawn-out answers.  I'd like to blame it on the fact that I had expected to be interviewed about a different topic and had to try to think of something meaningful to say on the spot, but my family and friends will tell you that vague, drawn-out answers are actually pretty common for me.  I'd much rather take a week or two to compose an essay on a topic like that than to respond orally off the cuff!

Don't worry, dear reader - I wouldn't dare inflict any such essay on you (at least not today; I don't have the time for anything like that).  If you are interested in the topics mentioned in that interview, however, I have several suggestions for where you might go to look.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

University of Lethbridge

The interview began with a discussion of the Masters of Education Inclusive Education and Neuroscience program in which I am currently enrolled.  This program is a new and innovative collaboration between the University of Lethbridge Education Department and the Department of Neuroscience.  That 3-year program is wrapping up this spring, but it looks like a new, fresh cohort will begin this summer. (If you are interested in applying for it, you'd better hurry, though; the deadline is today, Dec. 1, 2013!).  It has been a rewarding experience, but one that has challenged me as much as anything I've ever done (including first year teaching and parenting teenagers).

The best part of doing this MEd degree has been the wonderful cohort of classmates whom I got to know and who helped to encourage me through those tough times.  One of them has a fantastic blog that you really ought to read if the topics on my blog interest you (in fact, go there now and check it out.  Really - go now!) If you are interested in inclusive education, you should also check out the Inclusive Education Toolbox put together by another classmate.  I talked a bit about the cohort in the interview, but unfortunately they cut that part out.

Of course, you don't have to enroll in a Masters program to start learning about the brain.  There are are a number of great resources available online.  One free online course worth looking at is the Neuroscience & the Classroom from Annenberg Learner (thanks to another classmate for the link).

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

One reason that I was interested in applying for the Inclusive Education and Neuroscience program initially was the that the U of L was home to the highly regarded Canadian Centre for Behavioural Neuroscience.  Here is one of the "rock star" founders of that facility, Dr. Bryan Kolb, giving a talk which more clearly and elaborately explains the point I was making in the interview about the effect of experience on the brain:

It is a fascinating presentation, if you can spare the hour to watch it.  Many people are shocked to hear his description of the effects of pre-natal experiences and even pre-conception experiences (i.e. experiences of the parents prior to conceiving a child) on later brain function of the offspring.  Dr. Kolb also goes on to show how these experiences clearly effect later academic performance.  Teachers, however, may be disappointed that the content of this talk does not quite match the title, since very little of it has to do with the classroom until about the 50 minute mark.  At that point, Dr. Kolb does briefly give some reasons why neuroscience is important in education.  Those reasons are to:

1. debunk myths
2. provide knowledge about brain development and function,
3. provide informed solutions to practical issues

These are good reasons, and the examples he provides are interesting ones, if somewhat too brief.  Although Dr. Kolb was not one of my instructors, his colleague Dr. Rob Sutherland made most of the same points and we were able to look at them in greater detail.  Even so, I will admit that it was often still difficult for my classmates and me to make the connections between the neuroscience discoveries and classroom practices, especially at first.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Where I really started to "get it" was in reflecting upon the courses from the education department where it became clear that the knowledge and ideas from our neuroscience classes were the foundation for understanding pretty much everything else.  They were critical for understanding different conditions that affected student learning and behaviour, such as Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia, and Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder.  They were very important in understanding emotional and behavioural challenges and and the effects of trauma, neglect, or addiction. They were, in fact, the key to understanding motivation, memory, and attention in all children.

As I learned about the assortment of neurological factors that could come into play, the number of different forces which could influence them, the complexity of possible interactions, and the range of possible outcomes, however, I began to understand why it was so difficult to jump directly from neuroscience studies to recommendations for classroom practices.  It became clear to me that there was tremendous diversity in student needs and abilities, and that no single set of teaching techniques could be effective for all.  Instead, I became convinced of the need for teaching which was flexible and responsive to student differences.

You may detect a similar progression of ideas and understanding in this presentation by Dr. David Rose of the CAST (Center for Applied Special Technology):

It was in the materials from CAST that I first began to see a direct connection between the neuroscience and effective classroom practices.  They describe 3 broad categories of brain networks: the recognition networks which receive and analyze information (the "what" of learning); the strategic networks which plan and execute actions (the "how" of learning); and the affective networks which evaluate and set priorities (the "why" of learning). They then translated this understanding into guidelines for designing curriculum which accommodate for differences in these 3 networks by encouraging multiple means of representation, of action or expression, and of engagement.  They refer to this educational approach as Universal Design for Learning or UDL.

It was through UDL that I began to more fully understand and appreciate student neurological diversity in terms of difference rather than deficit.  Rather than relying on research to find some "perfect" strategy which would work for the highest number of students, or on neuroscience to tell me how to "fix" student differences, I began to see it as a means of better understanding the various different ways that students learn so that I can plan more inclusive and responsive instruction.  I began to recognize that the "average learner" was a myth, and that variability was a potential advantage:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Of course, I never said anything quite so meaningful or profound in my little 3 minute t.v. interview.  I said something about the promise of diversity and needing to change the way we look at things.  I paused and stumbled over words while trying to think of what to say next.  Of course, now that I've studied a bit of neuroscience, I've got a pretty good idea of what was going on in my brain which resulted in those behaviours.  That knowledge didn't help me to avoid being tongue-tied, but it might help me to understand my students better when I am tempted to put them on the spot by asking them to verbally answer unexpected questions in front of their peers.  And perhaps I might just come up with more flexible ways of allowing them to respond to my questioning.  Maybe I'll let them compose a blog post about it...

What in the world are SLIFE?

A few years ago I was having a conversation with the principal of the outreach school where I was the Learning Support Teacher. We were expressing our frustrations with the lack of a coding or funding category for so many of the students who were our biggest concerns. These students did not seem to have learning disabilities or cognitive challenges, but were simply kids with irregular educational histories. I joked that Alberta Education needed a new "crappy educational history" code. I also made the comment that "someone ought to do some research in this area." 

At the time, I was in the first year of my Masters in Education program.  I was enrolled in a research methods class and had to come up with a fake research proposal topic so that I could do an assignment simulating the process of putting together a research proposal.  I may have commented that I ought to use this topic for my project.

In any case, a few weeks later I got a call from the associate superintendent saying that he had heard that I was "doing my Masters on students with limited formal education" and wanting to meet to discuss it.  In short, my "fake" research proposal became a real-life project and somewhat of a passion.   I will be posting about it here from time to time, but today I just wanted to give a little introduction to the topic.

- - - - - - - -

The term SLIFE (Students with Limited and/or Interrupted Formal Education) was developed and popularized by Andrea DeCapua along with her co-author Helaine Marshall.  Students who fit this description are often categorized as English Language Learners (ELLs).   DeCapua and Marshall, however, assert that the term the term SLIFE more accurately describes a specific subset of ELLs, who have missed large amounts of formal schooling and/or have ongoing interruptions to their education.  These students typically also need to:

• develop basic literacy skills, 
• learn basic and grade level subject area concepts, 
• develop academic ways of thinking, and 
• adapt to cultural differences in learning and teaching.  

Unfortunately, many of these needs go unmet and these students are at a very high risk for dropping out of school and/or attaining very low levels of literacy as adults.  The research into this population is very limited, but the studies that have been published indicate that “the strongest predictor of L2 student achievement is amount of formal L1 schooling” (Thomas & Collier, 2002) and that “recent arrivals who had interrupted education abroad were 6 percent of all foreign-born teens, but because of their inordinately high dropout rate, they constituted 38 percent of all foreign-born school dropouts” (Fry, 2005).  

For SLIFE to be successful, educators must find ways to help them to learn academic thinking as well as content knowledge, and to to navigate our education system as well as improve their oral language and literacy skills . This process begins by recognizing SLIFE within our schools and developing a deeper understanding of their unique educational needs.

 - - - - -

According to DeCapua and Marshall, one of the biggest challenges in in the education of SLIFE is the mismatch between the goals and expectations of the students and the teachers. Teachers in our Western education system generally assume that:
  1. the goals of K-12 instruction are:
       a) to produce an independent learner
       b) to prepare that learner for life after schooling
  2. and that the learner brings along:
       a) an urge to compete and excel as an individual
       b) age-appropriate preparation for:
          (i) literacy development
          (ii) academic tasks

This is very different from the educational assumptions of most SLIFE who often come from cultural backgrounds where the preference is for:

• oral communication and  information sharing
•  pragmatic learning with immediate relevance
• working together and sharing responsibility

In order to create effective educational opportunities for SLIFE students, therefore, DeCapua and Marshall propose adoption of a Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm (MALP).  They have laid out that pedagogical approach in a number of books, articles, and presentations, including their most recent book, Making the Transition to Classroom Success: Culturally Responsive Teaching for Struggling Language Learners.  This approach requires both the teacher and the learner to adapt and stretch beyond the knowledge and behaviors which are most familiar and comfortable to them.  They argue that doing so will enable SLIFE to experience far greater success in our school systems and will better prepare them for the challenges of life in Western society.

(DeCapua & Marshall, 2010, 2011, 2013; Marshall 1998)

- - - - - -

Beyond the work of DeCapua and Marshall, information on the education of SLIFE is sparse.   There are a few educational jurisdictions, including New York State and the Province of Ontario, which have tried to address the challenges of students with irregular educational histories.  They have produced documents which summarize key strategies believed to be effective with this population.  Sometimes those strategies can also be found within the more extensive literature on ELLs, newcomers, refugees, and adolescent and adult readers.  Other useful ideas can be drawn from the literature on differentiation and accommodation of student differences.  In addition, teachers of SLIFE may need to become acquainted with strategies for assessing and teaching early literacy skills since many SLIFE lack those foundational skills.

In Alberta, there is no funded category for SLIFE, although limitations in educational experience are mentioned in documents describing ELLs and refugees.  In Southern Alberta there are large numbers of SLIFE that consist mainly of Low German speaking Mennonites. This population are not refugees but many are immigrants from Mexico and Central America whose education has been limited by cultural, religious, and economic factors.  It is often difficult to meet their needs under the ELL structures alone, but the SLIFE strategies being used in large urban centers are sometimes impractical in the rural setting.   

The Horizon School Division recognized that there was a need for greater study of this problem and made it part of their AISI research project for 2012-2013.  I was given some release time to be the lead researcher for the project, and I did a literature review and made a few presentations to Horizon teachers.  When the provincial government cut AISI funding in the spring of 2013, a number of Horizon teachers expressed interest in continuing our work in some form.  This fall we formed a community of practice using a blended format of online and face-to-face methods to discuss our ideas and experiences.  I have been fortunate to able to use my work with the community of practice as my leadership internship project for my Masters program.  

I know that we will be sharing the findings of our inquiry at some point in the future, but we are not yet at that point.  In the meantime, just wanted to mention the project briefly here on this blog because I thought that it might be of interest to others and show a different kind of "difference" that plays a major role in education.  If you have ideas, questions, or suggestions for me, feel free to leave me a comment in the box below.

 - - - - - - -

References:

Alberta Education (2012). Programming information: Organizing for instruction. In: Supporting English Language Learners. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Learning. Retrieved from: http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/eslapb/organizing_for_instruction.html

Alberta Education (2013, March 7). Funding manual for school authorities: 2013/2014 school year. Edmonton, AB: Alberta Learning. Retrieved from: http://education.alberta.ca/media/6858000/20132014fundingmanual.pdf

DeCapua, A. & Marshall. H. W. (2013). Making the transition to classroom success: Culturally responsive teaching for struggling language learners. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

DeCapua, A. & Marshall. H. W. (2011). Breaking new ground: Teaching English learners with limited or interrupted formal education in US secondary schools. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

DeCapua, A., & Marshall, H., (2010). Serving ELLs with limited or interrupted education: Intervention that works. TESOL Journal 1(1), 49-70.

DeCapua, Smathers & Tang, University of Michigan Press, (2009). Meeting the needs of students with limited or interrupted schooling. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

DeCapua, A., Smathers, W., & Tang, L. F. (2007). Schooling, interrupted. Educational Leadership, 64, (6), 40-46.

Fry, R. (2005). The higher drop-out rate of foreign-born teens: The role of schooling abroad. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.

Marshall, H. W. (1998). A mutually adaptive learning paradigm (MALP) for Hmong students. Cultural Circles, 3, 134-141.

New York State Education Department (2011). Guidelines for Educating Limited English Proficient Students with Limited Formal Education. Albany, New York: State Education Department

Ontario Department of Education (2008). Supporting English Language Learners with Limited Prior Schooling: A Practical Guide for Ontario educators. Toronto, Ontario.

Thomas, W.P., & Collier, V.P. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students. National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA) Resource Collection Series, No. 9.Limited schooling (n.d.). In Teaching refugees with limited schooling. Retrieved from: http://www.teachingrefugees.com/

What's been on my mind - November 2013

Wow - It has been a busy start to the school year.  I ended the summer with great intentions to keep blogging through the busyness but it has been harder than I thought.  I have several partially written posts that I chip away at whenever I get a chance, but they still need a lot of work.  In the mean time, here a few things that have been on my mind:

1. Families Made Us Human - In this Aeon magazine article, Columbia College philosophy professor Stephen T. Asma argues that it is families and feelings, rather than our large brains, that are responsible for the creation of human culture.  This builds on the idea, argued by Simon Fisher and Matt Ridley in Science magazine, that momentous changes in our genome may sometimes be a consequence of cultural innovation, rather than the cause of it.  As a parent and a teacher, I find this message reassuring in the face of the more common biological determinism which is so prevalent in the literature today.
2. I have always enjoyed Malcolm Gladwell's books and talks and the way he weaves counter-intuitive narratives out of scientific findings and issues from popular culture.  In his new book, David and Goliath, he suggests that many of the things which seem to be disadvantages can actually be "Desirable Difficulties" in certain circumstances.  One way that he illustrates this point is by making reference to the much greater than expected number of dyslexics among the ranks of highly successful professionals and entrepreneurs.  This is an example which I have previously used with students, parents, and colleagues, and it was interesting for me to see it utilized as part of a broader examination of the strategies used by underdogs.  His other main example is that of the extraordinarily high number of world political leaders who have lost a parent during childhood.  In neither of these examples does he downplay or deny the suffering that these challenges can cause, but he does focus on powerful positive effects that can come from having overcome adversity.  It is a hopeful message that I will try to remember when dealing with students who face often heartbreaking adversity.
3. In this book, Gladwell also enters the class size debate.  This topic is also very timely and relevant for me, as Alberta is very much in the midst of a debate on this issue.  Throughout the book Gladwell makes reference to an "inverted U" effect in which the input of resources into a problem initially makes things better, but where throwing more resources at the problem often results in diminishing returns or even to a worsening situation.  With respect to class sizes, Gladwell claims that there are benefits for students to reducing very large class sizes, but that those effects diminish and disappear as classes get smaller.  At some point, he argues, smaller class sizes can even lead to worse results.
   Having already spent considerable time on researching this issue, I was skeptical about both his thesis and his methodology (referencing a few studies by others and calling up a couple hundred teachers and asking them what their perfect class size would be).  He seemed to be oversimplifying the issue and drawing conclusions that went well beyond the available data.
   One aspect of his argument that really got me thinking, however, was his point that students with learning challenges often feel isolated and exposed in small classes, but that these same students tend to do better in larger classes where they can find others "like them."  Interestingly, a couple of days ago I had a conversation with a parent who made that exact same point about her son who had recently moved from a very small class to a very large one.  I know that this data is anecdotal, but I could clearly see how others might have the same experience.  It challenged me to refine my views on this issue and allow for greater nuance and complexity.
4. Over the last few years, I have been doing a lot of reading on the topic of consciousness, trying to understand the views of folks from Paul Churchland to Thomas Nagel to Ed Feser to Douglas Hoffstader to Walter J. Freeman III..  At times the scientific and philosophical discourse was a bit over my head, but I've learned enough to sketch out the main arguments of these differing views.  Recently, I came across an article by Princeton neuroscientist Michael Graziano in Aeon magazine which gave me a whole new perspective to consider.  Graziano proposes an "attention schema theory" in which consciousness is described as the schematic model of one’s state of attention.  While aspects of this model seem problematic to me, I will say that it did help me to come to appreciate the central role that attention plays in consciousness.  I may need to do a little more research develop this idea further in a future post.

When is a difference a disability? (Part 4)

According to the Huffington Post, there was one particular performance that really stood out during Comedy Central's Night Of Too Many Stars in October 2012. That performance was a duet between Katy Perry and a young girl named Jodi DiPiazza:

HuffPo reported that the performance left the MC, Jon Stewart, overcome with emotion, and that the most of the audience seemed to share this sentiment. Judging by the number of times that the video has been viewed on YouTube and by the comments posted below, I assume that a great many other people feel the same way. 

All of this reaction occurred despite the fact that Perry gives a restrained and pitchy performance (she was not singing in her usual key in order to match up with Jodi), and Jodi's performance is considerably less polished than one might see from any number of youth performers on shows like America's Got Talent. So what's the big deal?

From the YouTube comments, it seems that many people are inspired by Jodi's performance because she is autistic and has had to overcome many challenges in order to learn the musical and social skills necessary to pull it off. The Night Of Too Many Stars event was, in fact, a fundraiser for autism programs, and Stewart introduces the segment by explaining:

"We've told you why people with autism shouldn't be written off - why they deserve, like everyone, the chance to reach their potential.  That's why we're here tonight; that's why we're doing this.  So let's take a look at what happens when someone actually gets that chance."

But some might find that a bit condescending; "Hey, look at the disabled kid sing with Katy Perry; isn't that cute." One YouTube commentator, jenreyn905, expressed the opinion that,

"Only showing videos of Jodi's tantrums, dramatic music, and everyone's intense sympathy in the beginning video in no way shows that "people with Autism should be treated like everyone else." They should, but I'm sure there is much more to this girl than playing the piano and showing home videos of her screaming in front of thousands/millions of people. It's wrong"

This was definitely a minority opinion, but isn't there some truth in it?  How should we respond to portrayals of individuals with diagnosed conditions or impairments who overcome great challenges?

In this series of posts on difference and disability, I have shared videos featuring rock and roll drummer Dean Zimmer who has arthrogryposis, athlete/fashion model/public speaker Aimee Mullins who is a double amputee, and hip hop artist Signmark who is deaf. I came across each of these videos on social media where they have been shared and viewed numerous times, and I personally found them quite interesting.

I will admit, however, that I have been nervous about sharing these videos and making them the center of this series because of their potential to reinforce unhelpful stereotypes. Persons with disabilities have often been portrayed in the media as either heroic ( i.e. the "SuperCrip" model) or as objects of pity.  The videos I have shared have tended more toward the heroic portrayals, as do most that I see online these days.  In fact, it seems to be the element of heroism that makes them so appealing.

"And what is the matter with that, anyway?" some might ask. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Training Guide explains the answer quite simply:

"Do not assume or act as if persons with disabilities are heroic or courageous just by virtue of having a disability. This emphasizes difference. Persons with disabilities have strengths and weaknesses just as persons without disabilities." 

In the end, I decided to share these videos not just because I knew that they would catch people's attention, but also because of the opportunity they provide to examine our assumptions about disability.  I assert that one of the main assumptions that needs to be questioned is that "when persons with disability overcome adversity to do something "normal," they are being heroic". That kind of thinking reinforces the primacy of normalcy and further stigmatizes difference. What about those whose level of impairment is such that it can not be overcome and who would not be able to perform these tasks. Are they less heroic; less in need of recognition; less valuable? What about those who excel at things that differ from the norm?  Do we value their talents and accomplishments too?

None of this is to say that the accomplishments of Jodi DiPiazza, Signmark, Aimee Mullins, and Dean Zimmer are unworthy of recognition or appreciation. But we need to critically examine what it is about those accomplishments that we appreciate and why we are drawn to them. How can they challenge us to think differently instead of just reinforcing our biases about disability and normalcy? When we celebrate their overcoming of adversity, do we think of it mostly in terms of overcoming their differences to act more "normal "? Or do we recognize the adversity found in the prejudices of others and the difficulties in accessing necessary services and environments? 

And is it just the overcoming of this adversity that is worth celebrating, or can we not also celebrate the character exemplified by the day-to-day grappling with adversity that so many people with disabilities face.  Can we, perhaps, even appreciate the value of diversity itself and accept that some degree of adversity necessarily comes with it? In her TedTalk video, Aimee Mullins argues persuasively that:

"Adversity isn't an obstacle that we need to get around in order to resume living our life. It's part of our life."

For me, the beauty of the Katy Perry /Jodi DiPiazza performance was not that Jodi seemed "more normal" than in the clips from her childhood, but rather that she seemed so confident in her abilities and comfortable with herself, even though she was performing with one of her musical heroes in front of a huge audience.  I am not sure I could do that!  It was also the fact that she had been able to access the services she required to do what she needs to do in life and to develop her own talents and pursue her own interests.  Her father sums it up best in his admission that,

"As her education continues, I've taken off the idea that there's some limit on her because she, you know, continuously proves that that's not true."

When is a difference a disability? (Part 3)

Signmark is a Finnish hip hop artist with a world-wide following.  That is unusual enough.  He is also the first deaf artist signed to a major recording label.  If you are wondering, "How in the world does that work?", check out the short documentary video below.  At the 11 minute mark in the documentary, the narrator asks,  "Is deafness a disability, or something else?"  Signmark replies,

"My only aid, really, is an interpreter. But interpreting is still language; it's not an aide per se. If you knew sign language, I wouldn't need an interpreter here, right? So, am I disabled, or just a linguistic minority?"

Clearly, Signmark does identify with the term disabled to some extent.  He has been designated by the Finnish government as a special representative for disabled people, and he been part of the working group for the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).  That document has a definition of disability which I find very interesting.  It states that:

Persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.

It is the "in interaction with" part that really grabs me.  

It has only been in the last few years that I have come to appreciate the importance of external barriers to the concept of disability.  Prior to that, I had considered disability mostly through a medical model  that sees disability as a defective characteristic of the individual in need of fixing or therapy.  The United Nations definition, however, draws from a social model of disability, rather than a medical model.  In this model, disability is recognized as the consequence of the interaction of the individual with an environment that does not accommodate that individual’s differences.  

From Training Package on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disability/Pages/TrainingmaterialCRPDConvention_OptionalProtocol.aspx

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Training Guide provides a couple of illustrative examples of how this might play out:

• Being in a wheelchair (personal factor) combined with living in a city with accessible buildings (environmental factor) leads to participation in the community on the same terms as someone who is not in a wheelchair: there is little or no disability.
• Having an intellectual impairment (personal factor) combined with a belief in the community that persons with intellectual disabilities lack the capacity to vote (negative environmental factor) leads to exclusion from society and denial of the right to vote: there is a disability.

This perspective is particularly important within the education system because we are not a medical institution designed to diagnose and treat medical conditions. We are, however, a social institution, and we have a fair amount of control over the physical and social environment. We can identify barriers to full social participation and work to remove them. These disabling barriers might include the school facilities themselves, the attitudes of students or staff at the school, the rules and procedures for doing things (fire drills, assemblies, etc.), the classroom environment, or even the instructional methods, materials, and goals set out by the teacher.  

In the video below, David Rose of CAST  describes how curricula itself can be as disabled. This is also described in the document, What Does It Mean to Say that Curricula are Disabled? at the National Center on Universal Design for Learning website.

Signmark knows those barriers well.  He tells about the scorn he has received from hearing Finnish artists whom he says have resented his success. He also says that back in high school, when he expressed his desire to be an artist, all his teacher could say to him was,

"I understand you have dreams; I understand you have passion.  And I think that's great, but... you also need to understand and accept that you are deaf."

I would guess that his teacher had all the best intentions in giving him this counsel.  Sometimes it is hard to imagine how the barriers we face can be removed, and to believe that dreams and passion can be enough.  It must have been difficult to see how the education system could support him in achieving those dreams.  In fact, it is true that sometimes individual passion and dreams are not enough unless there are others working to support those dreams and help to remove or overcome barriers.

By this, I do not mean to diminish the determination and creativity that Signmark has displayed. He describes how the resistance he encountered has helped to strengthen his resolve, and this attitude was likely a critical factor in his success. The fact that he has been able to have a career and tour the world, however, is likely also due, at least in part, to the support and encouragement needed to overcome the barriers. In the video, for example, we see him working closely with his collaborator, Brandon, and we hear about the support he has received from the Finnish government and the United Nations.

In fact, if it is true that disability is one possible result of the interaction between personal and environmental factors, it is also true that successful development of ability is the other possible result.  As an educator, I may not have control over all the factors, but I need to be aware of those which I can control and to deliberately use them to help all of my students develop their abilities. 

In the end, Signmark's passion for hip hop, his desire to be an artist, and his determination to achieve his dreams are personal factors that have turned out to be every bit as important as his hearing impairment.  His career shows how a personal factor such as an impairment is not a disability in and of itself unless the environment is unable to accommodate that difference.  

So is it then the person or the environment that is "disabled"?

When is a difference a disability? (Part 2)

Definitions and labels are tricky things.  The word handicapped is rarely used any more because of the negative connotations associated with it.  At one time, however, it was considered a positive replacement for the words lame or crippled.  Now handicapped has largely been replaced by disabled.  This change was even reflected in legislation in the United States when the 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA)  was renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990.  If you are under the impression that that term disabled has mostly positive connotations, however, watch the first few minutes of this TED Talk by Aimee Mullins:

One can see that there is a tendency for the terms which replace politically incorrect terms to become tainted by the connotations of the previous ones. Steven Pinker refers to this as "the Euphemism Treadmill." It shows up clearly in the progression of terms used for persons with physical handicaps, where terms like physically challenged, differently abled, and people with disabilities have been proposed to replace the term disabled.  A similar progression has occurred in the terms used to describe cognitive or developmental delays, with the terms idiot, imbecile, and moron being replaced by mentally retarded.  That term eventually also became pejorative and was replaced with others like mentally challenged, intellectual disability, learning difficulties, and special education.  If we take history to be our guide, it seems quite possible that these new, politically correct terms will also become the insults of tomorrow.  I know that I already hear the terms special and different often being used in a mocking tone.

I don't believe that it is just the negative associations of the words themselves, however, that lead to their replacement.  I agree with Aimee that the words themselves can have qualities that lead us to think and act a certain way.  As she explains:

"It's about what we believe about people when we name them with these words.  It's about the values behind the words, and how we construct those values."

I am sympathetic to the values and intentions behind the more recent terminology. I also understand that they also have their limitations.

There has been an attempt, with words like difficulties and challenged, to move away from emphasis on the absence of ability towards language which allows possibility.  That seems very promising to me.  Are these terms specific enough, however?  Do they sufficiently express the extent of the impact of more severe conditions on the lives of affected individuals?  Not all those who are affected agree.

I also can also appreciate the desire to use People-first Language, (i.e. people with disabilities) rather than use language that emphasizes the disability (i.e. disabled person).  I also know that this language has been criticized for separating the person's identity from their trait or condition (by using the word with in-between the person and the condition), implying that trait is somehow bad or lesser.  This doesn't sit well with those who wish to identify with their distinctive traits, such as those who identify with the Deaf culture and the Autism Rights Movement. Others criticize  the term as being awkward and thus drawing undue negative attention to the condition.

Either way, one can see that it is a challenge to find terms which adequately communicate the intended meaning without conveying unintended negative ones.

In both the terms people with disabilities and intellectual disabilities, you can also see that it has been hard to leave the term disability completely behind.  It has been carefully defined in law and in documents by various jurisdictions and organizations.   In the United States, for example, IDEA remains in force, having been updated and revised a couple of times, and the term disability has become all tied up with issues of funding and qualifications and requirements for programs and equipment. This is also true in many other countries.  It seems to me, then, that it has become less a decision of whether or not to use terms like disabled and disability, but when and how to use them sensitively and respectfully.

In the mean time, Aimee has come up with her own way of handling the issue.  She uses disable in its verb form, and she makes up her own improved thesaurus entry:

Disable, (verb). 

To crush a spirit, to withdraw hope, to deflate curiosity, to promote an inability to see beauty, to deprive of imagination. To make abject.
Ant. to make poss-able

When is a difference a disability? (Part 1)

Dean Zimmer may not be a household name, but he is a great rock and roll drummer.  His drumming style is tight, passionate and musical, and apparently his band has opened for Foghat, Eddie Money, Paul Rogers, Styx, Kansas and Thin Lizzy.  He also has a physical condition that some would call a disability.  Watch him play in this 6-minute documentary, "Drummer Wanted," and see whether or not you would classify him as person with a disability:

 

"He is not handicapped - he is different," 

says his bandmate Rick Abbott.  Dean certainly is different from most drummers.  He holds the sticks differently and has them strapped to his arms.  He moves his body a lot more while playing, rather than just moving his arms and legs.  According to Rick, Dean's limitations contribute to his unique sound.  But is his condition a handicap?  According to the Oxford Dictionaries website definition,

a handicap is "a condition that markedly restricts a person’s ability to function physically, mentally, or socially."  

Is Dean's functioning markedly restricted?  It sure doesn't stop him from playing the drums!  Yes, Dean uses a wheelchair to get around much of the time.  According to The Los Angeles Times, he has a rare congenital disorder called arthrogryposis that makes it difficult to move his joints.  In the video, however, we see Dean driving, climbing, moving around and setting up his drum kit.  Rick claims that Dean can do anything anyone else can do, although it sometimes takes him longer.  I must admit that I had some difficulty understanding some of what Dean was saying at first, but I was able to understand him pretty well on second listen.

Does any of that meet the definition of handicapped?

Whose responsibility is it?

The other night I heard one of my sons watching a YouTube video that I had seen in one of my classes recently.   In it, 18 year old Texas student Jeff Bliss lectures his teacher about her classroom practices. “If you would just get up and teach ‘em instead of handing them a frickin packet," Jeff complains, "there’s kids in here who don’t learn like that."  Jeff goes on to say that “You want a kid to change and start doing better? You gotta touch his freakin heart. You can’t expect a kid to change if all you do is just tell them.”  The video went viral and sparked a lot of discussion about teaching practices and about student and teacher roles.  A lot of the debate centered on whether it is mostly a teacher's responsibility to be get kids excited about learning or whether students need to take more responsibility for their own learning. 

When I asked my son what he thought about the video, he admitted that there had been times where he had felt a lot like Jeff.  We talked a bit about those times.  It wasn't long, however, before he started telling me about a particular teacher whom  he really admired.  That teacher had not just covered content but had taught the learning strategies and study skills that he needed to remember and utilize the content.  He came out of that class feeling more confident as a student.  He wished that he had had that teacher earlier because he was sure that it would have helped him to have been more successful in his other classes.  I don't know if that is what Jeff Bliss meant exactly by "touch his freakin heart," but it must be something like that.  I couldn't help but feel that that teacher's willingness to do whatever it takes to help students be successful lead, in turn, to students being more willing and able to take more responsibility for their own learning.  It just isn't an either/or proposition.

As a Classroom Support Teacher (CST) for the last seven years, one of my main tasks has been to help teachers to come up with goals for students with Individual Program Plans (IPPs).  On almost every one, teachers either want to explicitly create a goal page for "greater student independence" or they work the words "independence" or "independently" into other goals.  One of the most common concerns expressed is that students will become dependent on the assistants, accommodations or support that I am recommending.  We are big on this independence thing.  During these conversations with teachers, I talk a lot about "scaffolding" student learning and of withdrawing that scaffolding over time.  I talk about explicitly planning for this withdrawal and about teaching the skills needed for greater independence.  I wonder, though, if I need to talk more about the importance of student success and growth in confidence.  If we withdraw supports too quickly or deny them all together, we reduce the chances for success and therefore reduce likelihood of students taking more responsibility for their learning.

And what about those students who might need certain supports for the rest of their lives?  Is there a problem with that?  I need my glasses to support my vision and pencil and paper to support my memory.  I will likely always need them.  Do these "crutches" make me more or less independent?  I still use a spell-checker and calculator.  Using these tools helps me to be more successful and gives me greater confidence in performing tasks that are difficult for me.  I have become quite masterful at using them, in fact, and I would argue that my performance on writing and mathematics tasks with these supports has been able to develop far beyond what it would have if I had never had access to them.

It could even be argued that writing itself is a "support" for our mind and our memory.  In Plato's  Phaedrus, Socrates argued that writing weakens the mind and the memory and the relationship between teacher and learner.  He's got a point. In fact, when Jeff Bliss criticizes his teacher for handing kids a "packet" instead of getting up and teaching them, he is making a similar argument.   A book (or a "packet") can't respond to questions or ask them.  It can't form a relationship.  On the other hand, print is has been extremely helpful in preserving and distributing knowledge well beyond what was possible through oral means alone.  I wouldn't be writing this blog post if I didn't believe in the value of print.  People today often make similar criticisms of digital technologies, arguing that they destroy traditional literacy.  I disagree, but I think we do need to use them critically and deliberately, specifically teaching the skills needed to use them successfully.

We need to be clear about our goals, not just about digital technologies or just for students with IPPs, but for all of our students.  If we want students who are independent learners and who take responsibility for their own learning, we need to plan for that.  There may be a number of different ways of wording it, but I think that the Universal Design for Learning folks over at CAST have got it pretty close when they state that:

“The goal of education in the 21st century is not simply the mastery of content knowledge or use of new technologies. It is the mastery of the learning process. Education should help turn novice learners into expert learners—individuals who want to learn, who know how to learn strategically, and who, in their own highly individual and flexible ways, are well prepared for a lifetime of learning.”  CAST UDL Guidelienes 2.0 

This won't just happen automatically for all students if we focus exclusively on covering subject content.  We must also take responsibility for teaching students how to learn successfully and for helping them to develop a desire to learn and a confidence in their ability to learn.  We have to stop treating this as a threat to the development of student responsibility, and see it instead as the necessary prerequisite.  In the end, we would do well to remember that:

“You want a kid to change and start doing better? You gotta touch his freakin heart."