Abstract
An Action-Research model of investigating children's learning used in two cultural and language settings is presented. The findings of a PhD research in England have been followed in Iran. In-depth case studies of pupils with SPLD have been followed. The conversational method of intervention aimed at encouraging self-organised learning has provided the suitable ground for recording different modes of children's responses and behaviour. They include attitudes to reading and writing, choice of texts, children's drawings of episodes of free-play, patterns of preferred learning activity, literacy skills and general social behaviour. The pattern of learning development seems to occur in various modes of behaviour in a simultaneous and parallel fashion. Yet levels of learning and skill in various modes may vary according to the child. Furthermore, an effective relationship between developments in different modes is observed. The confirming data across cases and cultures/languages suggests the possible viability of the multi-modal picture.
Viewed from a multi-modal perspective, children's difficulties in one mode (e.g. literacy) could be seen to be linked to learning needs in other modes. Exclusionist outlooks in special education and rehabilitation tend to focus on isolated modes or insist on preferential modes and skills (e.g. literacy). Hence, simplistic labelling, categorising and separating becomes inevitable and intervention strategies focusing on single modes play against children's natural (multi-modal) forms of learning. In changing our theories about children's beam processes we may help foster a more solid ground for inclusive practices in education and therapy.
Focusing on the conference theme, in this paper I aim to highlight aspects of children's learning processes which relate to inclusion and are often overlooked particularly in theoretical approaches to SpLD. These include "self-organisation" and observations made on the multi-modal nature of children's learning. Within the general goal of 'education for all' where do we place children with SpLD Children with SpLD are often marginalized, labelled and even refused enrolment in mainstream schools. On other occasions, their exclusion comes about as a consequence of psychologists categorising them as having "severe learning impairment" and requiring special school. Perhaps most children with SpLD in most parts of the world are among those who are enrolled in education but for a variety of reasons do not achieve adequately. Some are saved by their own struggle and creativity, others by a helping hand from a devoted teacher. Yet many of these children are side-lined, marginalized and effectively excluded. Often children suffering from other physical, social or emotional disadvantages have also got to cope with SpLD.
In the developing world labelling and overt exclusion of 'lazy' child becomes rather common while more subtle and 'covert' forms of exclusion still exist in the developed world.
What hurts these children is that their learning has been affected. The child's difficulty is obviously accompanied by relative inability on the part of the adults around him/her. Yet the perception of failure stays with the child and not the adults. Failing to learn adequately in a culturally high-priority area such as literacy or math brings with it prophecies of a dark future overwhelming and affecting the child further. Significant adults' impatience and anxiety are common in SpLD cases. While ironically this is an area where patience, understanding and composed reflection are called for. A relative lack of understanding encourages disbelief in the child's ability which in turn leads to:
a) an even tighter control by adults in areas of decision-making,
planning and leading any learning support programme and
b) reduced
tolerance towards child's natural needs and tendencies, brushing aside
suggestions of acitivities other than those directly related to literacy.
In our view these may form some of the important reasons for so many failures of many elaborate support programs and hence possible sources for effective exclusion of children with SpLD.
How we perceive learning, our theories about how children learn shapes the way we interact with children and intervene in their learning. Yet the group most particularly susceptible to our approach to learning are precisely the children whose 'failure' is in learning.
Two series of in-depth case studies of primary school children experiencing SpLD from two cultural/language environments (UK/English and Iran/Farsi).have been carried-out. Both groups (18 in total) of children lived at residential settings. Obviously adding an important emotional aspect to the children's needs profile (Children taken into care with the English group of children also categorised as having Emotional and Behavioural Difficulty).
Intervening to develop children's learning, aspects of their behaviour was recorded and mapped. The Action Research approach helped us as researchers to re-examine some of our pre-conceived theories about how children learn.
The intervention strategy selected is based on the concept of 'self-organised learning' proposed by Thomas and Harri-Augstein (1985). In their approach 'self-organisation' is not merely a route to a methodology but a comprehensive way of understanding human learning. Using this approach effectively to help children with SpLD we aimed to help them develop 'self-organisation' in learning, i.e. empowering them through 'learning-to-learn' (Sepehr 1994, 1995). The major elements of the methodology used by myself to improve children's learning are the following:
A conversational setting, giving a choice in learning activities yet raising awareness of a learning contract and reviewing it, recording and monitoring allowing children to reflect on their own learning behaviour and experience.
In a responsive and process-oriented recording of children's decisions and behaviour it has been possible to attain maps of overall learning behaviour over time. In an initial phase of experimentation, we marked a series of activities selected or preferred by the children. Using the literature on reading and literacy learning we set them out in a hierarchical table (fig ). Using Harri-Augstein and Thomas (1991) concept of three levels of learning conversations, three general levels of 'life', 'tutorial' and 'learning-to-learn' groups of activities were distinguished. The concept of three levels of conversation presents a useful framework integrating therapy, teaching and training as inter-locked elements in a holistic view of self-organised learning. This framework helped us to avoid a fragmented view of children's learning (as is often the case) and allowed us to generate maps reflecting how children really behaved, how they moved between levels and activities. The framework allowed for respecting children's tendency to behave in a multi-modal manner yet maintaining a general focus on the overall contract for literacy learning. Levels of Learning Activities Analysis Tool (LLAAT) (fig ) and the Cummulative Map of Learning Activities (CMLA) (fig ), are examples of behaviour maps while PLB-outcomes (fig ) contain rich evidence about outcomes of learning. Observing the patterns emerging within and across cases we conclude that:
a) Working on an overall contract for improving literacy learning
children show a general tendency to explore and experiment in different modes
of learning.
b) Personal patterns in choice and preference for modalities
of learning are accompanied with a general pattern highlighting the central
role played by the 'personal learning contract'.
c) Learning occurring in
different modalities and at different levels develop in parallel and
self-organisation at one mode or level shows-up at other modes and levels that
might follow.
d) Differences in cultural/language groups are more
reflections of specific needs of the children and differences in resources
available.
The idea that literacy-learning is founded on language development, that play and drawing are intertwined with language and literacy development, applications of therapy in dealing with literacy-learning difficulties are not new in the rich literature about learning (Vygotsky 1978,Montessori in Vygotsky 1978,Bruner 1964, Ferreiro & Teberovsky 1982, Lawrence 1985, 1988). Personal patterns of choice and preferences along with a general pattern relating to the central role of the 'personal learning contract' in the development of children's learning.
In our context, children exploring emotional confusions in free-play or drawing are not lost in a laizz-a-fair context but end-up finding purpose for reading and writing. Choosing a story, reading it or choosing to be read to acts not merely a link with motivation, but a step leading to self-initiated, focused activity to identify and overcome difficulties. Self-monitoring in literacy learning is reflected in social behaviour in other settings.
Coming back to the initial theme of inclusion we propose the following:
References
Bettleheim B 1991 On learning to Read & Zelan K Penguin
Bruner J S 1964 'The course of Cognitive Growth' In American Psychologist, Vol 19 No 1
Lawrence D 1985 'Improving Reading and Self-esteem' In educational Research, Vol 27, No 3, pp 194-200
Lawrence D 1988 Enhancing Self-Esteem in the classroom Paul Chapman
Sepehr H 1994 A Conversational Research into Self-Organisation and Literacy Learning by Pupils with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties PhD Thesis, Brunel University.
Vygotsky L 1978 Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological processes Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
CHILDREN WITH SpLD ARE OFTEN EXCLUDED
THEIR CONDITION INVITES DISBELEIF IN CHILD'S ABILITY
|
Other-organised support and remedial frameworks |
Disregard for child's natural needs and tendencies |
CASE STUDIES ACROSS AGE AND CULTURES
| Inherent ability to develop self-organised learning | A multi-modal pattern of learning process |
ACTION RESEARCH FRAMEWORK
THE INTERVENTION STRATEGY
THE RECORDING SYSTEM
DATA FORMATS
Patterns observed across cases
a) Working on an overall contract for improving literacy learning children show a general tendency to explore and experiment in different modes of learning.
b) Personal patterns in choice and preference for modalities of learning are accompanied with a general pattern highlighting the central role played by the 'personal learning contract'.
c) Learning occurring in different modalities and at different levels develop in parallel and self-organisation at one mode or level shows-up at other modes and levels that might follow.
d) Differences in cultural/language groups are more reflections of specific needs of the children and differences in resources available.
Suggestions for practice
1) We may best empower children by helping them develop 'self-organisation' and not by directing their learning in an 'other-organised' manner.
2) In helping children with SpLD allowing for elements of a multi-modal exploration and activity helps self-organisation as it helps develop children's awareness of their processes of learning. It is also a way to allow for a more natural approach by children towards attempting to overcome their difficulties.
3) Organising resources and skills in such a way as to allow for a better development of self-organisation is one important strategy to avoid children's exclusion. Allowing for learning in different modes to occur seems to be an important element in this direction.
4) Frameworks promoting 'other-organised learning' and those focusing on single modes (e.g. literacy-learning activities) could be counter-productive and may help foster exclusionist views and practices.
 |
 |