Wait...There's an App for That!

We've come a long way in a short time when it comes to electronics and digital literacy. Every classroom it seems has a flock of iPads or tablets available to students. Those with various learning disabilities are now enabled through the use of software programs that convert voice to text, text to voice, use word prediction to aid spelling and grammar, and graphic organizers to help students organize their ideas. This helps students who are bogged down with mechanics to comprehend, convey and organize their ideas. These are positive uses of technology that encourage students to gain skills so they can complete assignments independently. They are enablers.

Online resources including courses such as Coursera, Open University and tutorials such as Khan Academy, have been valuable supplements to students. The sheer volume of excellent resources available online is staggering.

On the flip side, I have seen classrooms taken over by the latest and greatest technology in less positive ways. In the name of "digital literacy", students are given time to work with various gadgets, games and software packages for the sole purpose of learning how they work. It doesn't take long to learn that not all online learning opportunities are worth the time and money spent.

I fear that often in the name of technology, important developmentally appropriate experiences are lost. If there is a hands-on way to involve students in the same topic, this should take priority over additional screen time as should any active learning opportunity which involves all of the senses and actually physically "doing" and manipulating things, particularly with younger students. Multi-sensory experiences allow students to take in information in a variety of ways and experiment in concrete ways not possible using computers or devices. Tactile information at the very least is lost when finger-painting is replaced with "less messy" painting apps or drawing programs.

Some teachers feel pressure to try and compete with the frenetic pace and stimulation of popular media. However, a place of learning often required calmness and a feeling of safety that is quite different from that kind of stimulation.

 Exploration is an excellent teacher, this is true, but we need to ask ourselves some questions before we devote large amounts of time and money to such activities

• Is this an open-ended or closed activity? Exploring with MIT's Scratch programming is open-ended; solving quests such as Oregon Trail, Carmen Sandiego are closed as there is a single solution and students must follow a single path; there may be a good case for occasionally using a closed game, but for the most part, students will have more learning opportunities with open-ended options?
• Are there assigned or agreed upon specific challenges to students in using the technology?
• Is there a way for students to share their discoveries in a meaningful way with other class members?
• Can any of these goals be met through non-electronic means? Is there a compelling reason why this learning should happen through the use of electronics? Learning to type and tweaking a computer program are activities best done on a computer; using math manipulatives and painting a picture work better with hands-on tactile feedback.
• Is there a clear set of learning objectives or goals for the time your students spend with technology?
• Is this the most efficient and logical way for the students to work on the topic?
• Does this lesson involve higher-order thinking? Many "educational" games are simply more drill, but with animated characters & sound bytes. This might appeal to some students, but spending large amounts of time on such activities is generally not time well spent.
• Have you discussed online citizenship prior to online work? 
• Are there clear rules and guidelines for use of personal devices in your school and classroom?
• Have you discussed how to determine the validity of online sources when research is involved?
• How does the quality of understanding as well as the finished product compare with that taught without electronics--is the Power Point or Prezi project as detailed and comprehensive as the traditional project booklet, the billboard-styled project or the dramatic presentation?
• Is this technology likely to carry on through the student's academic and later life? Spending an hour trying to get a game to work might not be time well-spent; whereas spending an hour teaching a disabled student how to work with Dragon (voice to text) software may carry through for many years
• Excessive use of graphics, particularly moving graphics, can be visually distracting to some students and may make it difficult for them to focus on the task at hand--is the program or app too "busy" and full of non-essential information to serve some or all of the students involved?
• Do your expectations include the use of computers, internet resources and/or personal devices outside of the school setting? Many students do not have ready access to these and must travel to a library, which is not always a reasonable expectation on the part of teachers due to varying home circumstances. This is important to keep in mind when grading assignments as well.
• For administrators and trustees: is this the best way to spend educational funds? Each case should be examined independently and free from corporate influences. While the presence of electronics in the classroom may appear impressive to parents, it is important that educators communicate the current state of developmental research to parents when such decisions are made. Corporations have the advantage here.
• In general: is this the best way to go about helping students achieve the specific learning outcomes for this topic?

There has long been a bias of some teachers to assign higher marks to projects that involved electronics in some way than those that didn't. This puts some students, particularly those without home access to devices and the internet, at an unfair disadvantage. Being clear regarding expecttions in your rubric or marking scheme ahead of time and remaining firm with those requirements may help reduce such bias.

In general, if we remember treat electronics as tools rather than the end in and of itself (except perhaps for programming, learning about the structure of the internet, media studies and learning about the specific electronics involved), the use of technology will be an aid rather than a distraction for learning. Otherwise, it can become a barrier to learning in terms of both classroom time, and in making the best use of limited educational funding.

Balance is important. In some homes, students are given free reign with screen time and may not get much time to be outdoors exploring, or doing other hands-on activities. Many students can name hundreds of brand-names and less than a dozen native species. In school, at least, there should be an attempt to encourage students to develop as well-rounded individuals. Replacing crucial activities such as arts and outdoor education with more screen time can create bad habits for life. When balance is encouraged, students may learn positive, healthy habits that carry through the rest of their lives.

Differentiating Between Gifted and High Achieving Students

The title of this post may seem, at least at first glance, to be somewhat of a non-issue to many (most?) people, be they parents, educators or the general public. And yet, if we take the time to do this, we might just find that we are suddenly better able to understand and meet the needs of a large number of students.

Unfortunately, our society is driven by test scores. Because of this, IQ scores are sometimes viewed as value statements rather than descriptors. More useful than the number is a look into the individual subtest scores in order to determine a student's relative strengths and weaknesses in order to better meet their educational needs. Achievement and IQ are separate aspects of an individual and only through a combination of the two are students able to achieve true educational success, that is, to continue to learn and grow as individuals throughout life.

Truly Gifted Students

Let me start with another idea that may seem contradictory: many gifted students underachieve, fail, or drop out of school. They are more vulnerable to mental illness than the general population. Their needs can be, and are often, overlooked. There is a tendency to misdiagnose associated behaviours as social defiant or ADD/ ADHD (Attention Deficit Disorder with or without hyperactivity), among other things. While it is true that one can be both gifted and have another such designation, it is often the case that the diagnosis is made through misunderstanding.

It is important to clarify what we mean by "gifted" in terms of both population and needs. Some places call all students who perform above average gifted; some rely on teacher reports, and others rely on a battery of standardized tests administered by a registered clinical psychologist to determine an IQ score, or when this is not possible due to subtest variation, a series of scores. [IQ tests are made up of several sections, called "subtests" which are made up of a series of tasks that test different cognitive functions]

Even when the students are properly tested, there is a discrepancy as to what magic number or numbers will be the "cutoff" between "gifted" and "non-gifted" populations. In some areas, this score can be as low as 120, and in others it is as high as 140. When you consider that an "average" score is 100, and a score of 70 is considered developmentally delayed (aka mentally retarded), the difficulties with the difference of 20 points in determining a gifted label become readily apparent.

For the sake of argument, I will use the number of 130; while recognizing that it is an imperfect designation.

In fact, the general consensus in psychological circles seems to be that 130-140 = gifted; 140-150 = highly gifted; 150-160 = exceptionally gifted and 160+ = profoundly gifted.

Let's think about a person who is profoundly gifted. This may be quite difficult for most of us, because a person with an IQ that high is literally one in a million. They are as different from "average" as someone who is low-functioning and will require lifelong assistance is on the other side of the distribution curve. Their needs are clearly very different than someone who is of average intelligence (90-110) or even highly intelligent or gifted.

I will try and put it another way to make my point here.

One definition for determining a learning disability is a discrepancy between scores of a subtest such that a low score is three or more standard deviations lower than the other scores.[It is important to note that there is a lack of consensus among professionals regarding a specific definition of learning disabilities and also of learning disorders] By this definition, a profoundly gifted student could have a learning disability in an area and still score in the gifted range in that area. Is this a problem for them? Possibly, if it affects their ability to communicate thoughts and ideas, or to remember them effectively. 

Even a student who is highly gifted might have a learning disability that is masked by their apparent "average" ability in that area. 

Students whose discrepancies are thus missed are at risk of low self-concept, frustration, and other emotional and academic problems.

In fact, even without discrepancies in different areas, gifted students have different needs than other students, particularly in the areas of emotional and social development, study skills, and executive functioning. It is not uncommon for these students to reach the university level without ever having had to study in order to do well. Since they have never had to learn this and possibly other executive functioning skills, they have not had any experience with them and can find themselves suddenly overwhelmed. They need to be specifically taught how to study and manage their time. Gifted students are often observant and reflective, and can have anxiety over local and global issues that their peers are not likely to understand. A program that is truly designed for gifted students should incorporate meaningful ways to address these issues that are unique to this population.

In terms of academics, each student will need their own IEP (Individualized Education Plan) which addresses their strengths and weaknesses. Always strengths before weaknesses! These students know they are different and they need to find ways to celebrate those differences in a positive way. It is important that these students learn how to cope with failure, which can only come when they are challenged at an appropriate level and supported emotionally so that they learn how to take risks and work towards a goal. Letting gifted students coast through known or comfortable material does these students a grave disservice and must be discouraged in order for these students to thrive, not only in school but also in life. 

Gifted students, particularly those with the highest IQs, need opportunities to meet and work together through conferences, exchanges, ability grouping where possible, etc. Mentoring with specialists and professionals in various fields of study can form an important part of their middle and high school education.

High Achievers

We all know the stereotype--the kids with their hands up, who hand in their assignments early with double the word-count, who do their homework and reach beyond it to understand the material inside-out. They are the Hermione Grangers of the world. These are kids who are average to above average in ability but who are for one reason or another driven to achieve. These kids know how to study because it is a way of life for them. They are organized and diligent, and they understand that their achievement is linked to hard work because they have learned this through experience.

Frustrations these kids may have often come from group work with less motivated students, delays in feedback from teachers, and material that repeats itself. 

These students are often the "do-ers" and "joiners" in the school, and some may enjoy leadership within and outside of the school setting. 

Academic enrichment for these students should include just that--enrichment. Guest speakers, field trips, and cluster grouping for project work, as well as opportunities for students to share their work with others will meet these students' needs much better than the gifted programming I describe above. Peer tutoring is also an option for these students, but should be a choice and not a substitute for enrichment, or a punishment. Students should not be given the job/punishment/perk of marking other students' work. This is the teacher's job, and it is the teacher's job because all students deserve a degree confidentiality.

There are, of course, students who belong to both groups--students who are highly motivated and gifted. I would argue that those students should have access to the options I outlined in the "truly gifted" section, mainly because I believe that those are the most crucial skills and issues that need to be addressed for any gifted student. The IEP should identify and aid in further meeting their needs.

When we envision programming for gifted students, we often think of the options I have described for the high-achieving group. In this way, we set ourselves up for many of the problems that riddle gifted education, particularly regarding those related to demographics. Between sexism, racism and elitism, gifted programming has many feeling that it is somehow an unfair advantage provided for a chosen few. It is no wonder then that many educators treat is as a sort of reward for accomplishments rather than a necessary means to meet student needs.

Only when we can be honest about IQs and the "gifted" label can we progress to the point where we can distinguish between the two and break through the barriers of misunderstanding in order to better meet student needs.

Writing and Fine Motor Skills

Two generations ago, handwriting received great attention in the schools. Many hours would be spent creating a flowing cursive script akin to calligraphy. The handwriting of our grandparents was often like a work of art in its beauty. Many people mourn those days, but as a person who always struggled with both writing and typing, and the mother of a son with a fine-motor learning disability, I find the current availability of word processors and other writing tools to be a relief.

Do we even need handwriting?

Actually, we do. The most important use of handwriting is one's signature. A signature is a wonderful thing. It is our own personal security code that we'll never forget. It need not be legible. It can be as decorative or plain as we desire. It is a symbol that has historically separated the illiterate from the literate, often with serious legal implications. In every aspect, it is a symbol of our own uniqueness.

Beyond the signature though, we do need our writing to be legible.

We need to be able to fill in forms, as many forms still cannot be filled in on computer. We need to be able to make quick lists and notes to others. Perhaps in the near future our smart phones and such will take over these tasks, but we're not completely there yet.

There are two main kinds of writing for the English language: manuscript (printing) and cursive. Since the type of most fonts falls into the manuscript category, and since traditionally this is what is taught and learned first, there are many people who advocate for its exclusive use. It is easier to read. Some people find it easier to write as they can concentrate on one letter at a time without worrying about the joinings. Many people can print almost as fast as they can write in cursive, assuming they have learned both systems.

But there is another population for which cursive may continue to meet a need. Students with fine motor disabilities may find cursive somewhat more accessible. When printing, the writer needs to position their pencil at the right place on the paper before starting each letter. To help new writers, some teachers use a ruler on the line below and/or show the writers how to space out words by placing a finger down at the end of a word to help them leave a "finger space" between the words. There is still a need to re-position the pencil after each and every letter. For those who fine motor issues, this can become a very onerous task. Add any visual perception difficulties (reversals, flips, "swimming words", etc.) and the task can become near impossible.

Cursive writing can help. When the need to re-position the pencil occurs less often, it becomes easier to complete a word. This doesn't mean the writing will become magically easier; cursive has its own challenges for these learners, such as planning ahead for coming letter placement, and remembering the high and low joining conventions. It can be like learning a new code for writing as it is becoming less common and students are less likely to be familiar with reading it. However, the trade-offs may be worth considering. Those who master cursive often find it faster than manuscript, but this may not be the case for everyone.

Fortunately, there are other options that help alleviate the physical demands of writing. There are adaptive keyboards designed to adjust for pressure, length of touch, etc.; regular word processing, speech to text programs, text to speech programs that allow students to hear their writing read back to them, and visual planning packages, such as Inspire. Each of these meets a different need and most programs offer a free 30-day trial to help you figure out what will best meet your needs.

It is important that students be able to express themselves well and often using whatever means works for them. These adaptations are not "crutches" but needed tools to enable them to continue to develop their communication skills. Slowing them down by forcing handwriting of any kind or even typing may cause them to write less and stunt their development. In such cases, it may be a good idea to separate fine-motor activities (handwriting, typing, drawing, etc.) from the communication activities (stories, poems, essays, reports, speeches, etc.) in order to allow students to continue to develop in both areas.

As homeschoolers, we have usually done things orally to compensate. In a classroom situation, this may not always be practical, but should be considered at least on occasion. Shyer students may need to do this one-on-one with a teacher or aide.

We are trying out various software options, and also working on developing finger strength and control, with the goal of improving legibility as well as increasing typing speed while using software to help with communication and academics in the meantime.

I'll let you know how it goes.