AD/HD & Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Look at Two Common Childhood Cognitive Disabilities

AD/HD

            Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD) is one of the most common conditions listed under the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) as a disability.  It affects as many as 5% of children – and three times as many boys as girls – and as such is a condition most educators will have to deal with multiple times during their tenure (AD/HD Factsheet, 2012).  Yet its commonality does not mean that coping with a child diagnosed with AD/HD is any easier.  Rather, treating the condition effectively requires sustained effort on the parts of both parents and educators.

            The symptoms of AD/HD are rarely difficult to detect.  On the contrary, much of the condition is characterized by acting our and a general lack of self-control.  The three major signs are “problems with paying attention[,] being very active (called hyperactivity), and […] acting before thinking (called impulsivity)” (AD/HD Factsheet, 2012).  These characteristics typically manifest as one of two types: the inattentive type, and the hyperactive-impulsive type.  The inattentive type of AD/HD is marked by a lack or attention to detail, often not following through “on instructions or finish[ing] school work or chores” (AD/HD Factsheet, 2012).  They are easily distracted, and often have the frustrating tendency to lose or misplace items much more frequently than their unafflicted counterparts, “such as toys, school work, and books” (APA, 2000, pp.85-86).

            The other common form is the hyperactive-inattentive type.  Much as its name would suggest, children with this version of AD/HD tend to have extreme difficulty sitting or standing still, and instead near constantly exhibit fidgeting, squirming, or frequent inappropriate running or jumping.  Another subset of this group may talk too much with seemingly little ability to stop their near-constant verbal outbursts, frequently interrupting, butting-in, or speaking out of turn (pp. 86).  Still other children exhibit a “combined type” which merges the two groups, often resulting in a child who has “problems with paying attention, with hyperactivity, and with controlling their impulses” (AD/HD Factsheet, 2012).

            It is important to note that all children exhibit these behaviors sometimes, and they are typically just normal parts of childhood.  Rather, AD/HD is likely when “these behaviors are the rule, not the exception” (AD/HD Factsheet, 2012).  These is no easy or quick “fix” for AD/HD, and it requires extensive knowledge and work by both parents and educators to construct a specialized program to assist their individual needs in the otherwise extremely challenging and rigid environment of the classroom.

PDD

            Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) is more commonly know as Autism Spectrum Disorder.  It encompasses a whole range of illnesses including Asperger syndrome, Rett syndrome, classic autism, childhood disintegrative disorder, and the blanket-term Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (Autism Factsheet, 2010).  Though this spectrum of disorders afflicts up to 1 in 110 children, its exact cause remains unknown.  Though boys are generally more than four times more likely to be diagnosed with a PDD, interestingly, Rett syndrome almost exclusively affects girls.

            In general, PDDs affect the child’s ability to “communicate, understand language, play, and relate to others” (Autism Factsheet, 2010).  Specifically, this can manifest as difficulty with the use or comprehension of language, difficulty relating to other people or events, strange play patterns with toys and objects, and repetition in both body movements and habits.  Additionally, other common symptoms can include “unusual and sometimes uncontrolled reactions to sensory information—for instance, to loud noises, bright lights, and certain textures of food or fabrics” (Autism Factsheet, 2010).  Though children with PDD consistently manifest such difficulties, they “can differ considerably with respect to their abilities, intelligence, and behavior” (Autism Factsheet, 2010).  Behavioral deviations can range from only talking or relating to a limited range of topics and having difficulty understanding abstract ideas, to its most pronounced of not communicating at all, but only using words or sounds in a repetitive, sometimes rhythmic manner (Autism Factsheet, 2010).

            A child with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder can, under the right conditions, do well in the classroom.  With both parents and teachers working together to fulfill the child’s specific needs – often with focus on building a predictable, consistent environment, increased used of visual rather than verbal presentation, and ensuring regular interaction with nondisabled peers from whom they can model behaviors – an autistic child can “grow to live, work, and participate fully in their communities” (Autism Factsheet, 2010)

Resources

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders  fourth edition, text revision (DSM-IV-TR). Arlington, VA: Author.

National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities (NICHCY).  (2012) Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Factsheet 19.  Retrieved from: http://nichcy.org/disability/specific/adhd May 5th, 2012.

National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities (NICHCY).  (2010). Autism Factsheet 1.  Retrieved from: http://nichcy.org/disability/specific/autism May 5th, 2012.

The Democratic Classroom & Multiple Intelligences

Part 1

For any class, it is critical to establish a code of conduct that can best foster a learning environment.  Traditionally this has been the responsibility of the teacher: to create, lay out, and enforce those rules.  Contemporary research, however, suggests a different approach.  Rather than a top-down, authoritarian generation of class rules, it is widely held that a more democratic, student-created set of expectations and guidelines can more effectively allow students “to empower [themselves], to motivate them to learn, and to help them discover their personal best” (Education World).  This approach can be furthered through the use of regular, student-led class meetings.

            Far from being a “gateway” to a permissive classroom with no sense of order, a democratized classroom does not eliminate the authority, but rather invests it in each student.  According to Dr. Marshall, by forming and then maintaining their own classroom rules through regular meetings, even “ An ‘unmanageable class’ can become a learning and caring community” (Marshall).  As student minds, like all human minds, are “pattern-seeking and pattern-making mechanism[s]” (Carson, 2002, p. 232), these classroom meetings glean much of their effectiveness and significance from their regularity.  Donna Styles describes her weekly class meetings very similarly to the orderly and procedural goings on of a town meeting: “desks are moved to the perimeter of the room and students take their designated places in a circle of chairs. […] Old business is discussed and new business is dealt with. ‘Thank yous’ and compliments are offered and the meeting is closed.  If a student wants an issue raised at a meeting, he or she places a slip of paper inside a box provided in the classroom. The papers, which include the name of the student and the date, constitute the new business of the next meeting” (Education World).  In a very important sense, the similarity to a city council minutes is intentional, as “to some extent, the process is the point” (Marshall).  It is only natural, after all, that a classroom community acting in a democratic fashion would resemble its large-scale counterpart.

            These sorts of regular class meetings provide even more than maintaining order and ensuring the student body has a vested interest in maintaining their classroom community.  In addition, they can provide valuable and pro-social life skills for all involved: listening skills, learning nonverbal communication, clarity of speech, empathy, fairness, tolerance, respect, and helpfulness are among the valuable skills students acquire during these meetings (Marshall).  Teachers, too, can gain valuable information and tools through these meetings.  They can “develop a closer relationship with their students. The relaxed conversation often reveals things about students, their families, and their circumstances which teachers might never have found out otherwise” (Marshall).  Even negative behavior or antipathy toward the idea or process of meetings can be revealing, if considered properly.  Kohn (1996) finds that behaviors such as acting out, testing, resistance, silence, or parroting can indicate students’ frustrations, expectations, and desire for order just a loudly as he most talkative student.

Part 2

            Intelligence is a fairly nebulous concept, difficult to define or neatly categorize, yet it is central to our work as educators.  Debate on the very idea of what the intellect “is,” how it is formed, and whether there is more than one kind is ongoing.  Still, there is now a general movement toward acceptance of the theory of Multiple Intelligences (MI).  Howard Gardner theorized that, while the standardized tests and most other forms of exams focused on students’ ability to solve problems or answer questions using their reading, writing, or mathematical skills – or as he would eventually call them, the “linguistic” and “logical-mathematical” intelligences (Sowers, 2004, p. 208).  Sensing that there were numerous other kinds of intelligences, Gardner would eventually formulate an additional six styles of learning: musical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalist (p. 208).  Cantu and Ruban (2006) note that “although Gardner initially conceptualized the intelligences as fairly independent, he also recognized that they are fairly interactive.”

            Though the study of and research into MI is now well into its second decade, “the development of standardized, reliable assessment tools […] has lagged behind the development of theory” (McMahon, Rose, & Parks, 2004, p. 41-42).  In part, this can be attributed to Gardner’s theory being justifiably criticized as “too broad for planning a curriculum” (p. 42).  Nevertheless, Gardner’s theory of MI “has had an enormous impact on education – perhaps more impact than any other theory that has ever preceded it” (Sternberg, Lautrey, and Lubart, 2003, p. 12).  Its implications that emphasized the importance of the classroom being “a place for [a given construct of intelligence] on the continuum between the overall notion of general intelligence and the long list of specific skills and subskills” have cause a fundamental alteration of the learning environment, the relationship between student and teacher, and the methodologies employed to effectively encourage learning (Cantu and Ruban).  Despite its inevitable criticisms, the theory of MI has drawn needed attention to the inherent biases present in classical testing and examination methods, and allowed some schools to adopt approached utilizing an MI approach with remarkable success: in Maryland, “a 20% increase in students’ scores on the Maryland School Performance Assessment after just 1 year of implementation of MI techniques across the curriculum” (McMahon, Rose, & Parks, p. 43).  This is not an isolated case, and its implementation has been shown to have positive effects in schools in around the country.

            There are challenges with implementing an MI-based curriculum, however, that cannot be ignored.  It can be difficult and time-consuming to apply the techniques to a school at an institutional level, and assessing its effectiveness – for instance, allowing a student with musical intelligence to be assessed by using a musical instrument – is “not always practical or feasible” (p. 44).  Still, despite its inherent limitations, in a world as diverse, interconnected, and stratified as ours, “’casting a broader net’ to identify and nurture people's diverse potentials is imperative” (Cantu and Ruban).  In light of the expanding definition of intelligence, it stands to reason that teachers would do well to take heed and implement as many MI strategies as they are able, and thus be able to effectively reach as many of their students as possible.

Resources

Cantu, C. and Ruban, L.  “Multiple Intelligences.” In Encyclopedia of Human Development, vol. 2, ed. by Neil J. Salkind, et al. (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2006), pp. 864-871.  http://asp6new.alexanderstreet.com.proxybz.lib.montana.edu/psyc/psyc.object.details.aspx?dorpID=1001021056 Retrieved: April 28, 2012.

Carson, R. (2002). “The epic narrative of intellectual culture as a framework for curricular coherence.” Science & Education, 11. 231–246

Education World. “Class Meetings: A Democratic Approach to Classroom Management.” 

 http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/profdev012.shtml Retrieved: April 28, 2012

Kohn, A. (1996). Beyond discipline: From compliance to community. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Mashall, M.  “Promoting Learning.”  The Teachers Net Gazette http://teachers.net/gazette/AUG00/marshall.html Retrieved: April 28, 2012

McMahon, S., Rose, D., and Parks, M.  “Multiple Intelligences and Reading Achievement: An Examination of the Teele Inventory of Multiple Intelligences.” In The Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 73, No. 1, Fall, 2004 (Taylor & Francis, Ltd.).  http://www.jstor.org.proxybz.lib.montana.edu/stable/20157383?seq=8&Search=yes&searchText=Intelligences&searchText=Multiple&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DMultiple%2BIntelligences%26Search.x%3D0%26Search.y%3D0%26wc%3Don&prevSearch=&item=1&ttl=2456&returnArticleService=showFullText&resultsServiceName=null Retrieved: April 28, 2012.

 

Sternberg, R. J., Lautrey, J., & Lubart, T. I. (Eds.). (2003). Models of intelligence: International perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

References

Carson, R. (1998). “Ourstory—A culturally-based curriculum framed by history.” EDCI 552 Coursepack. Montana State University, Northern Plains Transition to Teaching, Bozeman, Montana.

Carson, R. (2002). “The epic narrative of intellectual culture as a framework for curricular coherence.” Science & Education, 11. 231–246

Carson, R. (2003). “A Vygotskian Perspective on Culture & Cognition: A Reflection on How Tools Mediate Action .”  EDCI 552 Coursepack. Montana State University, Northern Plains Transition to Teaching, Bozeman, Montana.