October 31st, 2011

The F.A.T. City Workshop

part one of two

Over the past two classes we, the students, have been watching a film from 1989 called "How Hard Can This Be: The F.A.T. City Workshop". The F.A.T. stands for: frustration, anxiety, and tension.. which is what children with learning disabilities feel every day not only at school, but in life as well. And, in this film people from all walks of life (an engineer, a special ed. teacher, a mother... etc.) were guided in activities which were meant to make them feel as if they had a learning disability. 

One "vicious circle", as I would like to call it, that stuck out in my mind was:

Pressure creates anxiety.. and anxiety hurts academic performance. So, if a child feels pressure over let's say.. a test, that child may become anxious. Studies have shown that anxiety can hurt a child's academic performance .. so, if that student does, in fact, do poorly on the test it could result in the student feeling even more pressure on the next test.. and so, the circle continues. 

A fact/quote that stuck in my mind was:

"Learning disabled children take longer to process an answer, 

because they first need to process the question." 

This, to me, means that teachers need to be sensitive to the specific needs of children with learning disabilities... actually, to the needs of all children, not just those who have been specially "coded". If a student needs a little extra time to write a test, or a few extra minutes to answer a question.. what's the harm in giving him or her that time..? I don't see a downside, I see better test results which would in turn give the student more confidence in future test situations... nothing wrong with that!

Sadly, the fact is.. that is not the case!

When a child, learning disabled or not, gets an answer wrong he or she is most often scolded in front of the class and made to feel stupid. And, when that same child responds with a correct answer he or she gets no positive reaction from the teacher, merely a "that's right" or "correct", and the teacher then moves on to the next question. This obviously isn't always the case, there are many teachers who understand that doing something like that can be devastating to the student's confidence, but in the film this situation is emphasized. 

to be continued......

October 26th, 2011

Exceptional Learners

& Special Education in Alberta

        In Wednesday's class we began to discuss learners who are "exceptional". Dr. Nellis, our professor, said there has traditionally only been one way of seeing students:

"there are two types of students: normal & not."

However, his theory is majorly different, it is as follows:

"there are six billion types of people, and therefore, six billion types of learning."

Currently, Alberta schools opperate on the practice of "coding", but that practice is begining to be progressed away from. The basic idea of coding is that each student is assigned a code and based on that code the school recieves money for that student's education. The process, which the child has to go though, is as follows: 1) the child is put through two days worth of standardized tests, 2) the data from those tests is put together to see if the child has a disorder and if so, what kind of disorder he/she has, and finally, 3) if the child meets the criteria the school recieves money from the government which is meant to aid in that student's educational experience (i.e. aid worker, special bathroom needs, elevator, wheelchairs... ect.).  **multiple codes can be applied to one single student** This approach can be said to be a "mechanism for funding", or in other words, the more students with "codes" the more money that school recieves. So right there the flaw is easily visible.

Another approach, which is also being progressed away from, is the Individual Program Plan of IPP (as the cool kids call it). This is a collaberative approach where everyone (nurses, parents, teachers, aid workers, doctors...) is involved in the lesson and goal planning processes. Student's areas of need, and strengths, are taken into consideration when determining short term and long term goals and objectives. The good thing about this approach is that in the planning document it is specifically stated how the student's progress will be assessed and sometimes, if the author got ambitious, when said assessments will take place. This approach is very behaviouristic, a goal is set and the ourcome is assessed.. nothing more.

Moving forward, Alberta schools are going to be as integrated as is possible. This means that students who would normally be in a "pathways" class are going to be put into "normal" level classes. Obviously, this is not possible for some students whose disorders are too severe, and so there will still need to be a class for those students.. but for the most part students will be combined into regular classed. I am in the middle on this issue.. I do not think that all children should be forced to be in a class that is too advanced for them, while on the other hand I do believe that socialization outside of the "special room" is necessary for these students to succeed and grow. Being that I have worked in a pathways classroom for the past 2 years, I am undeniably bias. I have had children in my class who could easily assimilate into the general school population, but, I have also had students who could never survive in that enviroment. I am going to leave out names for privacy reasons, but.. one of my students, who actually goes to RDC now is a total social butterfly, and he is amazingly smart and athletic, despite his disability. He would benifit greatly from total integration as he was partially integrated in our high school. However; another one of my students, lets call him P, would, if integrated with a normal class, fail miserably. And I am not just assuming this, last year we tried integrating him into a normal drama class and for the first month or so he did great, he had little slip ups here and there, but for the most part he was coping well... that didn't last. By mid-april he had lost all focus, and interest, in the class.. he was constently absent, and when he did show up he paid no attention.. his integration experiance was the opposite of the other student I mentioned.. and so that is why I am torn on this issue..

I would like to leave off by asking your opinion... what side are you on and why? You don't have to reply on this blog, but just take some time and consider both sides of the argument.. which one resonates more with you... and why??

Thank you again.. I know this blog wasn't the most riviting to read.. but I hope the information managed to sink in, or jog your interest in the subject... as I have said this is a topic very near and dear to my heart, so it means alot to me that someone else is taking the time to think...

Sincerely,

Natasha.

October 17th, 2011

Femininity & Masculinity

In Monday's class we began to discuss gender and the ideals which we associate to being male and female. 

We, the students, were asked to each choose a male and a female whom we believe to embody the classic definitions and ideals of masculinity and femininity. I chose Tyrese Gibson and Sandra Bullock. 

Once we had chosen our two people, we assigned three characteristics that could be associated with femininity and three characteristics that could be associated with masculinity. They were as follows: 

FEMININITY                                                          MASCULINITY

- classy                                                                         - tough

- stylish                                                                        - successful

- beautiful                                                                    - unafraid

However, this quote from Vincent D'Onofrio is the perfect definition of masculinity and femininity, in my eyes...

"To me the definition of true masculinity - and femininity, too - 

is being able to lay in your own skin comfortably." 

D'Onofrio is basically saying that a person's masculinity, or femininity, is not defined by others... it is defined by how comfortable that person feels in their own body. It's the principle of confidence being more attractive than beauty. If a person is comfortable with who they are,   others will see that confidence and be attracted to it or enticed by it. So, in a sense, the six words chosen by the class to represent the ideals of masculinity and femininity are just that.. ideals. There will never be one strict definition to which everyone must adhere because humans come in all shapes, sizes, colors... etc. As D'Onofrio says, "the definition of masculinity - and femininity, too - is being able to lay in your own skin comfortably." As long as you are comfortable with yourself, who cares what others think. 

I realize this has been a short post, but honestly, it pretty much covers my opinions.. so I don't really feel a need to write more simply to make it longer. 

I hope what I have said is able to make you, my readers, think about the "cookie cutter" definitions of masculinity and femininity... and question their validity. 

Once again.. thank you for reading, it is much appreciated.

Sincerely,

Natasha. 

October 14th, 2011

Positive Psychology

Sorry, this post was meant to be written on Friday, but due to my CRAZY work schedule this weekend.. well, obviously it didn't. So, here it is :)


In Friday's class we watched a video (mostly because it was Friday and everyone was burnt out). In the video Shawn Achor, a professor at Harvard, was giving a speech about "positive psychology" what he defined as "concentrating on the above average, as opposed to the below average in order to move the average up." 


"Happiness is a necessity." "Don't be a perfectionist." - these are quotes Achor kept repeating, and I agree, to an extent. I believe that not everyone is allowed the privileged of being happy. Yes, it is nice to feel content, and yes, there are a fortunate few who will get everything they hope for out of life. But, in this economy, in this modern world, happiness has become a luxury. I envy those few who are allowed to experience true happiness because there are many, like myself, who will have to work in jobs that don't make us happy... simply because we need the money and can't afford to do what does make us happy. If I had the choice, I would be in Africa teaching English to children in a tiny village.... but no, I can't afford the thousands of dollars that it costs to do something nice like that. So, instead, I will be here in Alberta teaching hundreds of ungrateful teenagers who would rather drop out of school. Now, obviously not all of my students will be like that, but if the kids from my high school are any indication... I'm in trouble. 


Sorry for the rant, but that's just something that really ticks me off. Kids here do not realize how good they have things.


Anyway, back to the video. One quote in particular stuck in my head:

"The way of the emperor, is the way of the empire." - Confucius. 

I believe this means that by being positive yourself, people around you will become positive as well. I actually experimented with this today at work. I work in a liquor store, so I see every sort of person.. super rich, super poor, super drunk, kind of drunk.. and I decided to be overly cheery just to see how they would react. Overall people responded well, they smiled back, asked how I was doing.. they were just friendly. However, there will always be those select few grumps but I didn't let them "kill my buzz" (so to speak). But my problem is: people are only human, we are going to have our "off days", no one can be cheerful 24/7. So, then, should we fake being happy for the sake of others?

I know this has been a short post, but I hope that last question is enough to leave you thinking. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Natasha. 

October 12th, 2011

DIVERSITY

in the CLASSROOM

In yesterday's class we discussed the concept of diversity, specifically classroom diversity. We talked about, and defined, "socioeconomic status" - the categorization of people according to their economic, educational, and occupational characteristics - and related that concept to the idea that students may have certain "barriers" which need to be broken down in order for that child to succeed. For example, a student who was raised to respect people with a higher education is going to come to school respecting the fact that he or she needs to obtain the same; whereas, a student who was raised in a family of dropouts is going to come to school having no respect for higher education and no ambitions to obtain more than what is mandatory. However, there are always exceptions to any generalization. But that is not what I want to talk about...

Towards the end of class our professor, Dr. Nellis, left us with a "provocation statement"... it read: (this may not be exact)

 "If people want to move to this country they are going to have to adapt to us. I am not changing for anyone." 

My first reaction was anger, obviously, because the tone of the statement is just so ignorant and redneck, for lack of a better term. In fact, it is down right Albertan. Now, just as I have previously stated, there will always be exceptions to any generalization; however, it is a well known fact that Alberta is the most Americanized of all the provinces, and that statement is totally something one would expect to hear from an American redneck (the "melting pot" concept). And, just let me state again, this is not saying all Americans are like that, in fact my relatives are American and are perfectly nice, open minded people. 

Where I am from, Nova Scotia, people are tolerant and respectful; we understand that every culture has their traditions and values and beliefs and we respect that they deserve to keep them, regardless of where they live. Since I moved to Alberta, almost 9 years ago, I find myself, in a sense, losing that respect for diversity. I find myself becoming intolerant and somewhat racist, which is absolutely against how I was raised and its disgusts me. 

So, building off of what I have just shared, my next reaction was actually consideration; I began to consider the statement. Yes, it is true that a person moving to another country with another culture should make some efforts to adopt parts of that culture. But, it is also true that the people in the community should put in the same amount of effort to learn about other cultures. 

Despite what some may think, when people immigrate to this country they are tested on how much they know about Canada's history, culture, language and geography. The test is NOT easy, believe me I have taken it and have the certificate to prove it. In fact, studies have shown that most immigrants actually know more about those aspects of Canada than people who were born and raised here. 

And so, to finish off this post, I would like to ask whoever is actually reading my blog to think about the provocation statement. What would your stance be? Do you agree, disagree, not really care...?

Thank you once again for reading, and considering...

Sincerely,

-Natasha-

October 7th, 2011

The Intelligence Quotient

or

In Wednesday's class we began to discuss IQ testing, specifically testing on children and whether or not we agree with it being done. Personally, I am on the fence but, before I tell you why, let me explain how IQ testing actually works. 


The IQ Equation: a person's IQ is determined based on the score they get on a test... but it's not that simple. The test determines their MA or Mental Age, that number is divided by their CA or Chronological Age and then multiplied by 100. So, if someone's MA is 10, and they get a score on their IQ test that is equivalent to that which a 10 year old might get, that's 10 divided by 10 which equals 1, and multiplied by 100.. which would give the child an IQ of 100.   Therefor, the mean score for IQ testing is 100, anything less than that is considered below average and anything more than that is considered above average. 


Now that you know how a person's IQ is determined, I can explain why I am on the fence about testing children. 


First, a person's IQ is never constant; it does not stay the same throughout their whole life. In fact, a person can take the same test one month apart and score differently; therefore, it is not truly accurate. An IQ test can only measure a person's performance on that specific day at that specific time and under those specific conditions.  


Second, a child's results can hugely impact their future performance. For example, if a child does well he may become so overconfident that he no longer feels the need to study as hard, which could result in his grades dropping. Or, on the other hand, if a child does poorly on the test he may lose all confidence and no longer see a point to studying, which again could result in his grades dropping even lower. 


However, as someone who was tested as a child and did score fairly high, I do believe that in some cases IQ testing does serve to motivate students. In my case, when I found out how well I did it motivated me to stay at that level and I think I managed that fairly well. 


So, in my opinion, there are three possible outcomes of IQ testing (2 of which are negative, and 1 of which is positive). A child can become overconfident, discouraged, or motivated. And regardless of their score things do change over time, so the score does not define a child or map out his future. 




Yet again, thank you for reading my sort of rant/ sort of informational blog. :)


Sincerely,


Natasha.

October 3rd, 2011

Lawrence Kohlberg

In Monday's class we recapped Kohlberg's theory of moral development (originally discussed on the 30th of Sept.), and once we finished that we were asked the question do we think we have been able to reach the sixth stage... and I think I have. 

Kohlberg believed that with each decision we make we fit into one of three levels, each of which has two stages within it. The stages and levels are as follows: 

He believed that very few people ever actually reach the sixth stage, some of which could be: Mother Theresa, Gandhi, Buddha, Nelson Mandela, and the Dalai Lama. This stage is just as described... the people who reach it do so by making their decisions based on their personal beliefs without allowing social norms or public opinion to influence them. 

Out of the examples the one I closely relate to is Nelson Mandela, I believe he is one of the most selfless, compassionate, free-thinking, and motivated individuals to ever walk the face of this earth. I have tremendous respect for him and what he has done for South Africa. If I can even manage to make half the difference he has in the world, I will have achieved my life's goal. 

Having said that.. I do think that in some of my decisions I have been able to reach the sixth stage of moral development. I firmly believe in helping those who need to be helped, regardless of social opinion. A great example of this could be the fact that I volunteer at CAANS (the Central Alberta AIDS Network Society). Some people, who are too quick to judge, assume we are helping addicts to continue using drugs with no regard for public safety... but I really don't care what they think because they couldn't be more wrong. I chose to start volunteering at CAANS because I wanted to make a difference in my community, I wanted to be one of those people who others could come to for help and have to be afraid of being judged. Yes, drugs are harmful and dangerous... but it is ultimately each person's right to choose whether or not to do them.. and if someone does choose to do them it does not change who that person is, it does not make them a horrible person. The bottom line is drug users are people just like everyone else, with families just like everyone else, and they deserve respect and support JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. And so, I feel that by continuing to volunteer at CAANS, despite being told I am "no better than a crack dealer" on some occasions, I have been able to reach the sixth level of moral development. 

I do realize that many people will not agree with my choice to help these people in any way that I can.. that is their opinion which they have every right to express; however, I will caution anyone who is contemplating making their opinion vocal: I am very firm in my beliefs and I will defend them. 

Thank you for reading... I know I veered off into somewhat of a rant, but thank you to those who kept reading!

Sincerely,

Natasha.