(no subject)

[fpb]

My conservative friends may want to ridicule such things as sensitivity training, and certainly it can get to be no better than a racket. But faced with total ignorance such as this - http://www.palmbeachpost.com/treasurecoast/content/tcoast/epaper/2008/05/29/0529slteacher.html - does anyone dare say that sensitivity training in the matter of autism would not have done a lot of good in this case? This woman actually thought that she was acting constructively!

Comments

[super-pan.livejournal.com]

Autistic or not, singling any child out like in such a negative way seems more hurtful than helpful.

Boy, that teacher knew she screwed up big time though, you can tell.

[superversive.livejournal.com]

Sensitivity training in the matter of children generally wouldn’t have hurt, either. Apparently the dimwit did not realize that if an authority figure even looks like she might be granting permission to form a lynch-mob, the little monsters (there is an element of monster in us all, and it is unreasonable to expect children that young to have learned to control it in all circumstances) may queue up to form one, just for novelty’s sake.

You can be sure that nobody ever asked these kids whether someone ought to be thrown out of class before, and some of them may have voted ‘yea’ just to find out if she would really do it, and what would happen next. Would she really go through with it? Did they have that kind of power? People a lot more mature than any kindergarten student might well be tempted. (I can remember some sad instances from my own past.)

As for autism specifically, what I think the teacher needed was not so much sensitivity training as clinical training (if only on the level of a St. John’s Ambulance course: we can’t all be therapists). What autism is, how to handle it, what are useful and possible ways to engage children at various points on the scale. A teacher as ‘acluistic’ as this should not be called upon to teach an autistic child without being carefully informed on the subject.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I agree with everything you said. (Which is particularly nice because it represents a resumption of normal service.)

[dustthouart.livejournal.com]

When it comes to pop-psychology, the idea of an "intervention" seems to have taken particular hold on people's imaginations. I think that's what's at play here. The teacher seems to think that she can shock the child into realizing his faults and reforming. Much like reality show where a bunch of friends and family tearily confront a heroin addict.

Which just leaves out the problems that the child is five, possibly autistic, and not her child.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's what I thought she was doing. And it shows you that even if you ban the more obvious kinds of force from the classroom - the cane, etc. - the ways to be cruel are infinite, and most of them begin with good intentions.

"First do no harm" applies to education as well

[norwyn.livejournal.com]

As the mother of a child with high-functioning autism, and a public school special education teacher as well, I WAS APPALLED at this woman's actions.

Never mind that. As a human being, as a mother, I was APPALLED. This power-mad halfwit who managed to stumble through her university training and obtain licensure deserves the tar and feathering she would likely get if left unattended for any length of time.

My prayers go to this child and his parent. We were fortunate enough for my son to be diagnosed and receive intensive early intervention before he was two years old--you cannot replace those early years. This mother has struggles to face that may make this experience pale in comparison.

Sensitivity training? I don't know...if one is a teacher, and abides by the soul of this profession, than one IS sensitive, naturally, honestly, and looks to the child as the beautiful creation he is. Sometimes that is difficult, but there never is a place for ridicule or shame in the classroom. I pray my dear son never knows these things...