^M00:00:00 >> Kate Hurst: In the pod a little bit more. But thinking about this, I thought well, okay. I need to go back and I need to look at the, Are You Blind, and sort of look at what Lily says in, are you blind? And I went through and just kind of took some notes of things that stuck out to me. And she begins by talking about social and emotional perception. And she talks about these children that she came across, that we've all come across, which are described as having autistic-like behaviors, or that we look at and know that are especially developmentally threatened. And these are the kids, in my mind, that are the most involved physically, that are unable to do a lot letorically, who are not able to really connect with people very well for a variety of reasons, sometimes it may have to do with the fact that they've had a lot of hospitalizations. There's just a variety of reasons why that might occur. But what she says is that these are kids that have difficulty responding to contact from other individuals. And she goes on to talk about why is it that we call them autistic-like and not just globally, developmentally delayed. And what she says is that these are the kids, and again, I think most of us know these kids, that we look at their overall functioning and they can be involved in activities that are at a higher level than we see them responding emotionally. They seem very infant-like in their emotional response to people. But they're able to do some things at a higher level. And so we think, there's more in this kid, and we know these kids. We've seen them, you know. We know there's more in there, but there seems to be a disconnect between the way they function most of the time and these little bursts of brilliance that we seem to see with them. And so for her, she said that she has seen two different approaches to the way we address these children. And the first one, she says are programs that really focus on the child's intellectual development. And we assess their intelligence and we start working at them based on their intellectual response. And what she says she sees as the problem with this, and again, I have to agree with her, is that we get kids that a lot of times can seem to be trained to do things at a very high level. They can go through activities and routines at a pretty high level, but when left to their own devices, they're very passive. They don't do things. They don't initiate on their own. And, you know, I think a lot of us have seen this again, and again, and again. And it's like, this kid, I know can do stuff. Why is it when we're not there pulling it out of them, nothing happens? Yeah, and she said, when I think about why do I use my own intelligence as a human being, she said, it's, I use it to do what I want to do. I'm motivated by things that I enjoy. And so she theorizes that there needs to be a compatibility between our mind, what we know, and our emotions, which sort of drives us to do things. >> Cyral Miller: So they're doing things because we're doing them with them or to them, for them. >> Kate: Or we just sort of drag it out. >> Cyral: Right. >> Kate: They're not self-motivated. >> Cyral: Right. They don't want to. >> Kate: It's they don't want to. And so, you know, I think back to Van Dyke, and he says a lot of the same things. You know, that we have to, his thing is we have to follow the child's lead. We have to come into our interactions with the child based on what the child finds interesting or motivating. And at a very early beginning level, a lot of that is their own body because that's all they know. And so a lot of their things that are motivating to them appear to us to be self-stemmed behaviors. >> Cyral: Right. >> Kate: And our typical response to self-stemmed behavior is just to say, cut that out. Don't do it. >> Ann Rash: Well, it's also maybe if they don't understand that purpose. >> Kate: They don't. >> Ann: Where is this getting me? >>Cyral: Right. >> Ann: When we're following the developmental check list, or our IEP, we have a purpose in mind but the child doesn't see. >> Kate: No. Right. Right. I think that's really, really true. The other thing I thought about is when we look at what Van Dyke talked about with just the brain and how the brain functions, and his whole deal about the amygdala and everything. We know that a lot of how we respond to the world comes from that old brain and that thing that brings us joy, or pleasure, or whatever. And so I think that, you know, again, one of the issues that we have when we come at a child from this sort of intellectual approach is that we're not activating that amygdala. We're not finding things that bring joy or stimulation or motivation to the child. >> Ann: Which, for the child would look like play. >> Kate: Would look like play, exactly. >> Ann: Because all our brain comes in for play. And that's a lot of what is missing sometimes with this type of student. That we're looking at it developmentally, but not in a playful, enjoyable, what our body or brain is craving. >> Kate: Exactly. Exactly. >> Cyral: That's the emotional piece. >> Kate: That's the emotional piece, I think. And I also think that, you know, when we're looking at these children, and I think this is where we run amuck when we're trying to think about STARR-Alt and all of these things, is that our educational paradigm is based on an approach to teaching children that are always older than the developmental age of three. >> Cyral: Yeah. ^M00:06:15 >> Kate: And what we know about these kids is they're not there. And so we don't have a good educational paradigm in most of our school settings that relate to this. I mean, I think we almost have to look back at, what do we know about infant development. And what we know about infant development is it's about play. It's about exploration. It's about body. And it's all those things rather than tasks that we learn, we're taught to do. So I thought that was a real important thing. And she goes on to say that the problem that she sees with the intellectual/developmental approach is there's too wide a gap between their emotional and intellectual levels. It's difficult to motivate the child to initiate activities. And she said we make it difficult for the child to date to do what others expect him to do. And I love that whole notion, is that there's fear and there's stress involved for the child when we're putting them in situations where they perceive that they're doomed to fail. And, you know, I have to confess here. For me, this is one thing that really hit me, is that I tend not to look at these children as having the ability to think that they could fail. And it really hit me hard. I have to say it made me feel very bad about myself. I look at these kids and I don't give them credit for that very human trait that we all share, which is this sense of failure. And I think that that is something we are born with. I don't think it's taught. And I think that we forget to address that. That these kids, no matter how low we perceive them functioning, they have that compliment of emotional range that allows them to feel failure. >> Cyral: When I think about it, I don't think of that. I think of stress. >> Kate: Well, yeah, >> Cyral: But if you think about it as fear of failure, that's a whole 'nother spin on it. >> Kate: Well, yeah. I see what you're saying there. But whether it's just the stress of it or whatever-- >> Cyral: And what's bringing the stress, it might very well be-- I hadn't thought about it. I would say-- ^M00:08:37 < Multiple speaker > ^M00:08:38 >> Sara Kitchen: Anytime they move to do anything, they either get corrected or guided. >> Cyral: Right. >> Sara: You know, and they aren't able to complete anything by themselves so that interrupts their-- >> Cyral: Everything, >> Sara: --interests enough times that probably causes that, you know, they wouldn't put it into words like I'm afraid I'll fail. But, you know, it's that feeling. >> Kate: And that's that sense, I think, of self-confidence of knowing that they can do because we don't give them enough opportunities to do on their own to feel confident about their skills. >> Ann Rash: Also that sometimes we cut off the curiosity. And actually, if you watch an infant who, a typically developing infant with vision, everything they're learning is about curiosity and experimentation. And so sometimes when we set things up too quickly into this structured routine without interacting with the child and really finding their interests, what we've done is cut off their curiosity. And as a brand new teacher, VI teacher, I can remember even with all of my VI kids, wanting them to stop to tactually . Stop doing that. I want to show you how to do this and how to manipulate this object. And so what we have to do is let them have that curiosity and exploration, even if it looks very bizarre functioning to us. And that's where that mouthing comes in of trying to and looking at it as exploration instead of mouthing. >> Kate: Yeah, because you know, the one thing that we know, and Barbara Miles talks about a lot, is that whole development of the tactual sense for a visual impaired child, you know, is so critical. But even if you look at typical development, there is a very prolonged phase of mouthing with any child. And it's because there's so many sensory receptors in the mouth, in the tongue, in the lips, that give an incredible amount of information to that child. And if we think about a child who doesn't have good hand use-- >> Cyral: Right, what other choice do they have? >> Kate: What other choice do they have, yeah. >> Cyral: And I also think, you know, having been that not so new teacher, just to embarrass myself fully, in saying stop that, I know I've thought, you're 10-years-old, you know, or you're 11. Cut it out. Enough. You've had enough time. And if you think about it, maybe they haven't even had those opportunities since they were babies. >> Kate: Yeah. >> Cyral: Often times in my world I was thinking, well, but, you know, you're old enough now. >> Kate: Yeah, get over it. >> Cyral: And that's a hard one. >> Kate: It's a real hard one. >> Cyral: It's hard at school. >> Kate: It's very hard at school. And I think it's very hard to explain to parents too, you know. >> Cyral: Right. >> Kate: Who are no better equipped to understand this than we are, you know, much less often times. Yeah. But I do think that that is a piece of it. Kind of getting back to this, one of the other things she talks about is she says, you know, there are other programs that really seem to focus on the emotional development of the child and they give that child a lot of physical contact and this, that and the other. And she says the problem with this, and I've seen children like this, is that children become very affectionate and they're seeking physical contact constantly. They contact or connect with adults like a six-month-old baby. They never really initiate activities or play with toys on their own. And I think back to Linda Haygood's assessment, that infused skills assessment, where we get these kids who are-- >> Sara Kitchen: The people kids. >> Kate: We call them people kids, very, very social. I mean, they are incredibly social, but they don't do anything with toys or materials unless you just really are goosing them to get along, you know. And I think that, you know, again when we come back to it, finding that balance between where that emotional development is and their intellectual development is really a critical, critical piece that we don't pay enough attention to. And I do mean "we". Because every time I think about a kid, you know, I don't try to say, are they balanced? How can I help that balance come about better? And I think looking at doing an assessment like the functional scheme assessment that Lily has, gives us a way to sort of say, is this kid in balance and are there things that I might need to do more? Should I maybe give this kid more time with materials and independent play? Or if the kid is all into objects and not too social, should I begin to infuse myself and more interactions into it, you know? And I think that maybe that's where we're missing the boat. No matter what approach we're using, whether it's Lily or Van Dyke, because Van Dyke says the same thing. He uses a slightly different approach, but it's the same thing. How do we do that? ^E00:14:19