Learning Robert

The question I posed had many answers.  The first was that Robert must have memorized the order in which the program presented the pictures.  According to this theory Robert responded to the complex pattern of visual stimuli.  He was still not given credit for ability to discriminate aurally between labels.  It has to be said that as long as I remember Robert always had an ability to discriminate aurally between specific sounds.  What he didn’t have was to understand sounds as communication tools. So Evelyn, one of the teachers, spent some time on the computer program trying to figure out the pattern of presentation.  She didn’t discover any. The second theory was that Robert’s ability to discriminate among sounds was much sharper than in typically developing children and thus he couldn’t generalize into one “word”  differently sounding utterances.  Whenever someone said a word, the same word, for Robert, according to that theory, it presented itself as different sound.  Different in pitch, length, volume, accent, and whatever else can be different.  That faulty, human pronunciation was contrasted with a consistent computer voice that was providing directions in exactly the same manner.  That theory was consistent with my observation of Robert’s ability to discriminate among sounds.  For instance he knew (without looking) which car passing outside his apartment belonged to his mother.

As you might have noticed, both theory would opt for Robert having and applying some special skills not observed typically in children. One being ability to memorize complex pattern and second having a hearing too sharp for his own good. I don’t negate a notion that Robert possesses some special skills. Unfortunately, I encounter them often and blame them for most of my difficulties in teaching my son. Still  a few months later, when Robert finally gain some minimal grasp of language as a tool of communication a simpler explanation presented itself.

Teaching Robert First Words

It would be interesting to hear other people explanations of this strange development described bellow.

Robert didn’t have any receptive language for the first 4 years of his life.  He had a few “expressive” sounds – words’ approximations – to ask for things he considered important.  I just remember one: “juice”.  I know he had at least two other, but I don’t remember them now.  Still, for six months before his fourth birthday his ABA teachers/therapists tried to teach Robert to discriminate receptively between two objects. Evelyn and Caroline were doing this through discrete trails format.  They placed two items in front of Robert and asked him to touch either object A or object B.  Thirty times in the session.  Three sessions a day! After correct answer the therapists  gave Robert a piece of cookie or candy, after incorrect answer they didn’t give him anything.  Between two answers the therapists took time to record the replies and the level of prompting.  They also moved the two objects  either putting them back in the same spots or changing their positions.   They did it for six months from September of 1995 till end of February of 1996 but Robert seemed oblivious to their demands.  He couldn’t pass through the threshold of 80% correct answers. So the therapists kept on repeating the task and Robert kept on failing it.   At first I was teaching Robert in the same way. Soon, however,  I became concerned that because my  foreign accent differed from the correct American pronunciation of the teachers, I might confuse Robert  and inhibit his learning.  So I stopped.

Nonetheless, during this time we purchased relatively simple computer program First Words I.  The program was similar to discrete trails in its approach to teaching receptive labeling. It showed two pictures (later three, if I remember correctly) and asked the student to touch one of them.

But there were differences.  The program didn’t show the same pictures again and again for 10 or 30 times.  After each answer, correct or incorrect, the screen produced two new pictures.  Moreover, for the same word , for instance: “table”, it switched between two different images of the object.  As you might guess, the program didn’t feed Robert any cookies or candies but instead displayed a happily jumping icon after correct answer and highlighted the proper picture after wrong answer.  And soon Robert, working mostly independently, taught himself receptive labeling off all 50 words in this program.   For the six next months he was demonstrating ability to respond to computer’s voice and continued to learn from next level First Words II .  I am not sure if he was also learning from the  First Verbs during that time, although we bought that program as well. Yet, he still couldn’t differentiate between ANY two objects when his therapists/parents ask him to.

That lasted for another six months – from March to  September of 1996.

This phenomenon forced Robert’s therapists and PhD level supervisors to come with different hypothesis as to its cause..

What hypothesis could that be?

Teaching Robert 3

There is a danger of imposing our ways of teaching on the student without understanding what the student already knows and how he/she knows it.  This might result in the “object” of our educational efforts to loose what he/she had known  before we started to push our knowledge on him/her and  not grasping our “ways” of doing things.  For instance, there are few approaches to teaching a child to subtract large numbers with regrouping.  One is to just go one step at a time as needed.  To take one out of tens place and change it into ten ones and so on.  The other is to analyze the whole minuend and do all the regrouping at once before subtraction.  This is what my son attempted to do while working with me.  Except I didn’t grasp that fact and consequently I tried to stop him every time he was trying to do just that. I “made” him to subtract the way I was teaching him.   Since he couldn’t explain to me what was his method he ended up confused and I had much harder job of teaching him “my way” than I would have if I understood his approach.

Those problems are, in my opinion, very frequent.  They do not apply exclusively to children with special needs.  They are frequent in education of typical children and result in reduced performance on tests and maybe later in life.  It is an imperative that teachers realize that what children know and how they know it might affect the results of teaching.

Those problems, however, have much more serious consequences in education of children with special needs as it is much harder to understand what the students know already and HOW they know it.

This post refers to my latest observations.  Observations I made not only of Robert’s difficulties in learning, but also of my arrogant attitudes toward teaching. These attitudes  do not give “an object” of my endeavors any credit for thinking independently.  And consequently they lead to learned helplessness.  The child stops trusting his own thinking and continues to look for clues in the environment. And those clues might be very misleading.

Teaching Robert 2

I don’t know if any new mother or a mother to a freshly delivered child is consciously aware of the teaching curricula she supposed to pursue while bringing up her offspring.  There is an abundance of  songs, toys, nursery rhymes, and of  silly gestures and sounds the mother can choose from and she does so  haphazardly; more in accordance with her hormones (or heart if you prefer ) than with her analytical mind.  It is not that I consider caring for a newborn, toddler, or preschooler a brainless job. Yet it is an endeavor much more intuitive than for instance preparing your teenager for college by suggesting courses, helping with application, and paying for SAT preparation programs.

And so I too dipped into the bank of culturally established behaviors,  overused nursery rhymes and warehouse of colored, plastic toys.

And nothing seemed to work.

So I  looked to others for help, for instructions, definitions, explanations, and directions.  I search for specialists with expertise in rearing children like mine.

I have to leave that thread unfinished, promising to return to it later.  Finding specialists is much more complicated than it seems. That is a topic which requires not just its own paragraph, but its own chapter.

I approached Early Intervention Program in my town.  Once a week a young woman who reminded me of sloth with slow moving, sleepy approach to her work (and maybe her life as well) was coming for…. well, I really don’t know for what.

To help me find medical specialists in a state to which we just moved in?  Well, I found all of them and went to first appointments before she even took all the intake information.

To tickle my son?  Well, she did that.  And yes, he liked it.

I  don’t know if there was any other purpose in her visits.  Still, every time she came she brought the same toy with her. A plastic box with four holes on top surrounded by colorful rings.  With box came a hammer and four colorful balls.  As she was boring herself and me with these pointless visits my son was playing with the toy.  Banging the balls down with a plastic hammer.  On one of those tiresome visits he lost interest.  He was running aimlessly.  He was clearly irritated.  I cut the visit short.

As soon as this young woman left Robert and I went to an educational toy store and I bought the same toy.  After returning home we play with the toy for less than 15 minutes and in that time Robert learned to match by colors.  The strategy was simple.  Whenever he wanted to place red ball in differently colored ring i placed my hand over it and restricted the access.  Only if he matched ball and red ring he could use the hammer.  No more than fifteen minutes!  He generalized this skill to other colors by himself. He matched all four colors perfectly and he generalized this skills to other items and other colors.

It was so simple!  Just give a proper directions, simple cue and Robert learns.

So, why was that young woman unable to teach my son anything?  The simplest answer would be:  she didn’t care.

She was working for Early Intervention but she didn’t care.

And that again is a motive that will repeat itself through my son’s education.  People who do care and people who don’t.

Guess which kind crowds the planet?

Teaching Robert

One day Robert, two years and six months old at that time, wanted a drink.  His small hands were too weak to tilt a full large bottle of Welch’s White Grape Juice to the side to pour the juice into a cup.  As Robert held the heavy bottle in his hands, he tried to move it in all directions.  He noticed that it was much easier to tilt bottle  toward his mouth.  So he did just that.  He pour the juice into his mouth and then discharged it INTO the cup.  After that he drank the juice from the cup.

He did this only once as he must have immediately discovered that he could simply drink straight from the bottle.

This episode happened more than 17 years ago. Yet it demonstrates better than anything else issues that impacted Robert’s development, his learning processes, and his difficulties in life.

Firstly, he solved his problems cleverly.  Because of that one event I always knew that he was smart and capable of learning and thinking.  No matter what his IQ was like and what I was told about his capacity for learning I knew he could learn.

Secondly, I knew that he went through all that trouble without asking for help because he couldn’t ask.  He couldn’t communicate.  I am not sure if  he even had an idea that we, his parents, could be asked to help…

Every day Robert demonstrates to me how much he can learn, how much he can do.

But he still  cannot explain himself.

So I am here to attempt explaining him.

He is unusual human being.  Very much worth knowing.

Maria Hrabowski

Digression

As I am writing this I am tempted to write everything at once.  Many things are connected; influencing each other in positive and negative ways.  This temptation to explain all the connections that span 20 years of my son’s life, can be a huge obstacle to writing.  It might affect clarity. It might end in an impossible to untangle knot. Those thoughts on writing  are there to put me back on track and organize my observations and interpretations of processes to complex to be described in, so called, linear writing.