Chicken or the Egg

The age-old question of "which came first, the chicken or the egg" can easily be asked in the education world.  Here is the Chicken and Egg in the education world, "which came first, a learning disability that causes behavior or a behavior that causes learning difficulty?"

I have taught some awesome students in my school, and the behaviors usually come from a complex concept that they scream "I can't do this!" or "I don't understand this!"  It has led me to wonder why learning disabilities and emotional/behavioral disorders cannot both be diagnosed in a student.  Did you know that?  A person can not be labeled with both an SLD and an EBD according to the federal law, they are mutually exclusive.

Apparently, not understanding something that everyone around you understands doesn't cause any behaviors or emotional problems.  If you don't understand why 1+1=2, I think that is going to cause some possible behaviors or emotional problems such as self-esteem and depression problems.  When I struggled with math through all of my education, I really did want to take the chair or table that I was working at and throw it across the room.  Here is the difference, though, I never did that, I wanted to, but I didn't.  This brings up the question: "Well, why do some students throw chairs or flip desks while others don't?"  The answer to that is personality, it depends on if the person's personality is impulsive or not.  If a person is impulsive, they are more likely to throw the chair and tip the desk because they are frustated.

So which came first, learning disorder or behavior problems?  Another rhetorical question to which I do not have a perfect answer, just an opinion.  Both happened first, the learning disability affects the behavior, the behavior affects the learning.  Or, the behavior affects the learning and then the learning disability affects the behavior.  They work with each other to create behavior problems.

Who do you Serve First?

With all of this testing that is required in the united states because of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), questions arise about who should we serve first.  Should we serve the students who are close to passing the tests or do we serve the students who are so far below that they need our help now.  Which ones should we do first?

This is kind of a rhetorical question, one that I do not have an answer to.  I have my thoughts, which is we need to serve both.  Being a future special education teacher, I am biased towards wanting to help those who are so far below that it will take a lot to help them pass.  I like the challenge and it is worth it, because while they may not pass the test, you will be able to see how much progress the students make.  Gains will always be made, however, the question is: who should determine whether the gains are big enough?

I just don't understand why we have to choose between helping those who need our help and helping those who need our help desperately (desperately creates a sense of pity, so I wish I could think of another word for this, but can't right now).  It creates yet another dichotomy, and how do we decide?  Many teachers decide based on which ones they want to work with more.  Those students with problem behaviors are more likely (I have no proof of this, recognize that) to be in that group of needing help desperately.  Many teachers view problem behaviors as difficult, so many teachers are more likely to work with those who don't need the help as much.

A few weeks ago, a teacher sent a student to me to teach a student how to put on his snow pants.  That was borderline ridiculous, if not completely over the line of ridiculousness.  Why can't the general education teachers teach the student themselves while they are on prep?  I don't even end up getting a prep because general education teachers send our students to us and we have to deal with them.

Change

I am not even going to start this blog off by saying that it has been a long time since I last posted (oh, crap! I just did say that by saying that I was not going to say it.  CRAP!).  I haven't been kicked out yet from Lincoln and I don't think I will be kicked out.

Well, I want to discuss how hard change is.  I have already mentioned many times that change is hard.  But I want to talk more about a change that is detrimental to life.  A change in our thoughts.  I went into my student teaching experience expecting that what I had would work.  What I had was a summer full of people with disabilities and how to deal with them.  Call me stupid (because I know I am), but I had this philosophy.

I knew one thing, though.  I knew that I knew nothing.  The more you learn in education, the more you learn that you don't know a single thing.

But viewpoints change in life, whether we want them to or not.  I didn't expect/want my teaching philosophy to change, but change it has throughout everything that I have done.  Day 1 was only observation, day 2 started it up.  By day 3, I was doing everything, teaching every lesson.  My life has changed because of this in the most amazing way.  My teaching philosophy looks almost identical to what it was before.  With the change of this: We cannot always be the student's friend or buddy.  We need to be what they need us to be.  If that means being a teacher, then be a teacher.  If that means being a should to cry on, then be that shoulder.  I need to use a holistic approach to teaching, and I hope you will as well.