Josh

Duncan
Art Education for Exceptional Students

Response to Readings on Social Stories, Autism, Death, IEPs, and Behavior Goals

Appendix A describes a social story with a ratio of 5 descriptive and perceptive
sentences for each directive sentence. I found this an unusual way of describing how
to present material to a class. Knowing that the use of specific language was
thoughtful: for example the difference between a generic word like behave and sit
still. I wasnt clear at first whether these social stories are supposed to be a
general resource or a material specifically targeting children with autism. The
application of comic language and sick figures vs. illustrations was very relevant to
my interests in comic making (93). Stick figures allow a situation to be more
generalized. It was helpful to get a full example of a social story at the end of the
article. There wasnt much advise on how to relate it to the student who needed to
hear it. For example, should they be read outside of regular class time, or along with
other students?

It was disheartening to hear how many kinds of experts Anne-Maries mother went
to before making any progress (84). Robin and Bridget emphasized reducing the
amount of information to the rudiments of language, as if teaching a baby. I really
appreciated the authors reference to Anne-Marie being knit together in my womb
and found this a healthy way to think about the childs development and the nature
of autism.

HospiceCares outline of childrens ideas about death was informative, thought the
outline structure forced me to read carefully to understand the meaning (109). For
example, I knew that some kids thought of death as reversible, but I dont know
what is meant by children thinking of death as continuous with life. Does this mean
that they understand that death comes after life even if they dont understand
everything about death?

The three big questions for an IEP are: what are a childs needs, how will the district
respond to those needs, and what are the goals? I dont know why they call it a non-
form (119). Is it because they want to distance IEP from something else which uses
complicated forms? Because its individualized, I found the idea of describing the
child as you would to a caretaker who has never met the child and needs to know
important information.

I recall in class our guest telling the story of IEP forms being filled out en masse, so
even when supervisors try to devise something they think is simple, human nature
seems to be to work around the forms and checkpoints put in place by people in
authority. Sometimes, I worry that the knowledge that experts have about these
individualized needs is as reliable as the many experts who unsuccessfully tried to
cure the autistic child from earlier readings.

Specifically, reading the common recommendations that this studentneeds never
to hear if only he worked harder, and the need for a non-competitive
atmosphere. Sometimes, I dont know what specifically this means. No competitive
dodgeball? No use of grades to try to shame kids into performing better by saying If
only you did work like Johnny or Jane. While I understand how the
recommendations of the judges and hearing officers would make sense in particular
cases, my immediate questions are: what do these recommendations mean in
practical terms for the teacher organizing a class and whats the reasoning process
behind determining the needs and solutions for these special needs children? Im
mostly concerned about a special needs child with great potential slipping through
the cracks because we are concerned (with good cause) that criticizing their work
ethic is counter-intuitive.

This reminds me of problems we faced while doing the art workshop. Bill was able
to perform many actions without me taking his hand, and even used the scissors
effectively on his own after I used hand-over-hand. There seems to be a fine balance
between too high expectations for a special needs child and low-expectations.
Maybe a particular special needs child who is high-functioning could benefit from
the constructive criticism that Smith and Strick warned against.

Fortunately, the text says these should be fitted to the needs of an individual
student, so those closest to a student can make a determination about which of
these 10 common needs apply to the student and which wouldnt. This
individualization would assuage my concern that hundreds of kids are being fit into
a box by a distant administration (125). They also later defined how a real goal was
different than a vague, undefined goal.

When they described Aarons drawings of monsters and blood as an example of
inappropriate behavior that required a social skills program, I wondered what
specifically about these drawings prompted this response (136). Drawing monsters
seems like a think most children draw without us saying they are unhealthy, so
would drawing monsters without drawing bloody torture still count as Aaron
making inappropriate work according to this criteria?