For example, if you have a student who uses switches for access with their head like my son. Lets say the switch is attached to a lightbulb. Please know this is an example, but I'll tell you that I'm sure they use something stupid in the lightbulb's place. Let's make it interesting by making it a strand of colored lights. So the teacher defines mastery as "student must hit switch 9 out of 10 times for x amount of time to activate pretty strand of colored lights." Data will be collected on one of the teacher's cute little data sheets. Let's say disabled student number one used the switch 3 times in a row and got the "wow" feeling by activating the colored lights 3 times. Then said disabled student, who can't communicate, but is smart enough to realize that colored lights are pretty the first three times and then really stupid and boring after that.
This student can't say "hey this is stupid, give me something more interesting." Does the teacher ever think of that task as boring and dull... probably not, but the student doesn't ever show mastery because the student didn't complete the task 9 out of 10 times. Day after day, this student has the switch hooked up and the lights plugged in and maybe on day 5 the student hits the switch 1 out of 10 trials, another day 0, or another day twice, because the task is boring and dull, but they keep putting the student in front of this task expecting him to "master" the task to show that this student understands switch access. This is called repetition to mastery or whatever stupid term some lame educator came up with to label it.
With typical toddlers and preschoolers who are learning their colors we show them red. They say "red" we move on to the next color. We don't hold up red, get out a tally sheet and make them tell us it's red 9 out of 10 times in a row. You'd mix it up a bit to keep it interesting. If you didn't would they continue to tell us it's red or would they be smart enough to think "if they keep asking me if this is red, maybe it's not really red? Do they want me to tell them a different color?" Or do they throw a tantrum and refuse to cooperate, because they are becoming frustrated and don't understand why you keep having them do the same thing over and over and over? If you wouldn't treat a normal functioning child this way, why in the world would you treat a severely disabled child this way?
This was how my son was expected to learn by repeating these same demeaning tasks over and over and over. No wonder he checked out the only way he could by falling asleep. No one ever explained to him the purpose of these tasks. If you do this it leads to this a communication device, the ability to say yes, an hour out of this classroom, etc. The educators instead labeled him as "unmotivated and unteachable." How fair is that? No one asked him what he thought was motivating and interesting. No one asked him if he thought this was boring. No one ever gave two cents about what mattered to him. What mattered to them was the ability to collect their data and show that he had mastery as defined by THEM.
Now lets talk about data. They use the data to justify the mastery of a goal or to modify it. But how often did they the educators forget to collect their data or not ever collect it at all or they were inconstant. Who suffers for this oversight or laziness? Certainly not the educators.
Smart kids, physically disabled and the non-speaking or even the normal ones, learn quickly how to manipulate to get out of things they do not enjoy. Many are successful at it by feigning sleep or suddenly needing to use the restroom, perhaps a tantrum, or just disruption of the lesson. Smart kids find away to make things bearable.
No comments:
Post a Comment