-­‐Issue  1    October  2011  -­‐    

International  Issues  Committee  Newsletter  

Autism  Training  in  China  By  Helen  McCabe,  Hobart  and  William  Smith  Colleges

The Five Project, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that is committed to strengthening the capacity of families and educational programs in China to meet the needs of individuals with disabilities, with a focus on developmental disabilities such as autism. The author began volunteering with children with autism in China in 1992, and after many years of seeing the increasing needs of families and professionals, she co-founded The Five Project, Inc. (FIVE) with her sister, Karen McCabe, in 2006. The author is a member of the TASH International Issues Committee and she and Karen McCabe presented a poster about The Five Project at the 2009 TASH Annual Conference. FIVE provides a number of services in China, as well as to Chinese speaking families in the US and elsewhere. These services include: providing training and consultation to autism professionals and parents in China, and to international autism professionals planning to volunteer or work in China; running ongoing support groups in Nanjing; creating and providing written and video information and materials; collaborating with autism organizations in China to provide volunteer opportunities for individuals interested in disability there; and holding events and activities to promote awareness about disability in China. Because FIVE was founded after years of volunteering and research about autism in China, its autism expertise is especially sought out, from teachers and organizations both in

China and the US. In the past year, FIVE’s team conducted two mutli-day onsite training workshops for teachers and parents in China, one in Nanjing, and the other in Anshan. FIVE co-founders were accompanied by another trainer and a volunteer, and we worked together to provide intensive hands-on training at programs serving young children with autism. The focus of

the training was on restructuring the environment based on principles from TEACCH methods, as well as on basic instruction using Applied Behavior Analysis (discrete trial teaching). Our trainers and consultants include individuals certified as a BCBA, as well as with advanced degrees in special education. In addition, The Five Project has four Board members who are fluent in Mandarin Chinese, and who have all lived, studied and worked in China for many years since 1992.

Co-founder/author Helen McCabe gives a lecture about autism on World Autism Awareness Day in Nanjing, China. (co-founder Karen McCabe far left).

TASH  IIC  Conference  Events  Int’l Issues Committee Meeting: Friday, Dec. 2, 12 – 1, Room 213

Saturday IIC Roundtable: 9 – 12, room TBD Visit  the  TASH  IIC  Blog!  http://tashicblog.blogspot.com/

 -­‐Issue  1    October  2011  -­‐    

All of our training is provided either directly in Chinese by the co-founders, or provided in English by other trainers but translated into Chinese by the co-founders. Teachers and parents who have attended FIVE’s training have commented that the training is extremely practical and easy to understand, both because of our ability to provide instruction in Chinese, as well as our deep and longstanding connection with autism work in China. At the same time as we are receiving increasing requests from autism organizations in China to provide teacher and parent training, we have also been approached by non-Chinese (such as U.S. and European based) organizations who are beginning to do autism training work in China. We are committed to providing consultations to disability organizations that plan to visit China but have no knowledge of the country or autism context there. Finally, we have also been approached by large Chinese research institutes

and government offices who want to “do autism work,” but are unsure how to start, and we have begun providing consultation to them as well. In addition, FIVE makes available on its website Chinese language video and written materials about autism (www.thefiveproject.org). We welcome consultation requests from professionals and organizations who have opportunities to go to China and want to gain a stronger foundation in knowledge of autism in China before embarking on a volunteer or other trip there. We receive so many requests for volunteers (ongoing) or training (short-term) from autism organizations in China and so we also welcome inquiries from individuals who perhaps have a plan to go to China and would like to volunteer or work with us. Contact us at info@thefiveproject.org or thefiveproject@yahoo.com.

 Educating  the  Policymakers:  The  Need  for  Implementing    Inclusion  in  the  International  Community  By  Pavan  John  Antony,  Adelphi  University

Inclusion is a buzz word that is visible in most educational documents in the international community. Many countries around the globe have adopted inclusive systems of education with the primary aim of educating all its citizens in regular classrooms. However, ten years after the World Education Forum adopted the Dakar Framework for Action, “Education for all,” there are still more than 113 million children in the world who have no access to primary education, and 880 million adults are illiterate (Puri & Abraham 2004). These reports encourage us to think about the effectiveness of implementing educational laws and policies globally. In other words it is important, to rethink if we need better policies or if we should educate those people in power who might not understand the implications of inclusive education. For the purpose of this article we will use India as an example. In India alone, it is estimated by the Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI) that there are 30 million children with disabilities in India (Office of Chief Commissioner of the State, as cited in Singhal, 2006). However newspapers and some nonprofit organizations

estimate that 60-70 million people with disabilities reside in the country. Timmons and Alur (2004) estimated a total of 50 million people who are “disabled” or have “special needs” (p. 40). So it is important to note that the existing data on the number of people with disabilities in India are highly unreliable. Despite the passage of several laws to implement inclusive education, a government report in 1994 stated that ninety eight percent of the “disabled” do not receive any care from the government (Alur, 2007; Timmons & Alur, 2004). This is the status of the second largest populated country in the world. Today when admission of children with disabilities to any public school is no longer an issue in countries like the United States, millions of children with disabilities in places like India struggle to find an education or disability-related services in their home lands. The word inclusion gained momentum in Indian setting especially after the country became involved in international initiatives on inclusive education. The Salamanca Statement is considered one of these significant initiatives to implement inclusive

 -­‐Issue  1    October  2011  -­‐    

education in the international community. By signing this agreement, India agreed to educate all its children with disabilities in regular schools with no segregation. However, even today inclusive education has no accepted definition in the Indian context (Singhal & Rouse, 2003). It is considered to be an utopian ideology in India (Sen as cited in Singhal, 2005). Moreover, the terms “inclusion” and “integration” are used interchangeably by researchers in the Indian context (Singhal, 2005, 2006; Kalyanpur 2008). There is no direct meaning for the word “inclusion” when translated into any of the thirty five languages spoken in the country. It is very clear that there is a state of confusion from the top to bottom levels government officials regarding the concept of inclusion. When this confusion exists among people in power, a similar state of the general public is easily understandable. Based on my personal work experiences, several parents of children with disabilities were not only unaware of their legal rights but also failed to translate or understand the meaning of words like “IEP” written on their reports from teachers in special schools. Today, special schools in India continue to provide services for its few citizens with disabilities in segregated settings. Throughout India the majority of services for people with disabilities are delivered through nonprofit organizations. These organizations operate mainly in urban areas, while seventy percent of Indians live in rural areas (Timmons & Alur, 2004). Further, as these

schools charge fees, they are inaccessible to the poor. So it is clear that the education of poor children with disabilities special schools is nearly impossible and children, whether rich or poor, in rural areas have virtually no access to any education. Further, most of the special schools fail to admit children with severe or intense service needs. There is no research base to point to reasons for the failure to admit these children in special schools. However, the reasons could be due to the lack of trained teachers and service providers or resources. Children with disabilities remain invisible from the general public and continue to be an oppressed group in the entire society. India is one of the 35 countries not likely to meet the goals of “Education for All” by 2015. I would argue that countries like India will not be “Fully Educated” unless all its citizens with disabilities are educated in regular public schools from a young age. When our leaders and policymakers continue to make and modify national and international policies to include all children, they forget the fact that countries like India are still struggling to fully implement the first international (Salamanca) initiative to include all children into its education system. Policymakers at national and international levels continue to build new projects and refine existing policies on inclusion based on unimplemented policies, while forgetting to look at past failures. This is the time to set a new agenda at international level:

LET’S EDUCATE THE POLICYMAKERS

                                                 New  book  available  from  Harvard  University  Press,  available  November  2011!   Inclusive Education: Examining Equity on Five Continents Edited by Alfredo J. Artiles, Elizabeth B. Kozleski, and Federico R. Waitoller Through funding from the Spenser and Motorola foundations, Alfredo Artiles and

Elizabeth Kozleski were able to bring together teams of researchers from several countries including Kenya, South Africa, India, Argentina, Sweden, Austria, Germany, England, and the US to develop a framework for analyzing inclusive education in each of these countries. With a particular focus on historical and contemporary contexts within each country, researchers examined the equity issues that are embedded in the structural, cultural, and political environments that surround and infiltrate schools, classrooms, and the cultural practices embedded in designs for learning. The book represents a strong cross-national examination of these issues punctuated by a final chapter by Ray McDermott and his colleagues at Stanford on Global Norming. What inclusive education has come to mean in various contexts makes this a particularly fascinating read and raises so many questions including how does the appropriation of language intended to promote particular kinds of activism and advocacy affect a movement?

 -­‐Issue  1    October  2011  -­‐    

                                                           New  book  available  from  The  Council  for  Exceptional  Children,                                                                          available  October  2011!  

Collaborate Smart: Practical Strategies and Tools for Educators By Susan M. Hentz and Phyllis Jones

This book provides tools for improving co-teaching and collaborative communication among members of teaching teams.

References Alur, M.(2007). Forgotten millions: A case of cultural and systemic bias, exclusion in India. British Journal of Learning Support, 22(4), 174-179. Kalyanpur, M. (2008). Equality, quality and quantity: Challenges in inclusive education policy and service provision in India. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(3) 243-262. Puri, M.. & Abraham, G. (2004). Handbook of inclusive education for educators, administrators and planners: Within walls, without boundaries. New Delhi: Sage Publications India. Singhal, N. (2006). Inclusive education in

India: International concept, national interpretation. International Journal of Disability, 53(3), 351-369. Singhal, N. (2005). Mapping the field of inclusive education: a review of Indian literature. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 9(4), 331-350. Singhal, N., & Rouse, M. (2003). We do inclusion: Practitioner perspectives in some inclusive schools in India. Perspectives in Education, 21(3), 85-97. Timmons, V., & Alur, M.(2004). Transformational learning: A description of how inclusionary practice was accepted in India. International Journal of Special Education, 19(1), 38-48.

                                 Korean  Parents’  Accounts  of  Behavioral  Intervention  Services  By  Sungho  Park,  California  State  University,  Los  Angeles

Every year, increasing numbers of children in Korea are diagnosed as having autism spectrum disorder. With more children diagnosed with autism, there are more demands for behavioral therapy. I had opportunities to interview several Korean parents who have children with autism and received behavioral intervention services. Interestingly, it seems that Korean parents did not like some of the behavioral intervention strategies. In the following article, I would like to share some of the lessons that I learned from interviewing the parents. Korean parents did not like to provide primary reinforcement, such as giving candy for their children engaging in an appropriate behavior. This is because children seemed to follow directions only when they were given a candy or something to eat. The appropriate behaviors disappeared as therapists stopped providing the candy. Also, some of the parents reported that providing primary

reinforcement seems very similar to the way animals were trained. One parent stated that it was like animals that got meat for their performances, as seen in the zoos. Also, most of Korean parents with whom I spoke were opposed to using timeout. There were various reasons behind this. A few parents stated that it seemed that the therapists suggested this method for many children with autism who would easily find timeout as rewarding rather than punishing. There was even a therapist who locked 5 year-old-boy in a garage. The child was very scared in the dark and cried. Finally, he had to be let out for safety reasons. It seems that there are behavior therapists who are not very well trained and apply behavioral intervention strategies in inappropriate ways. Another behavioral intervention strategy that did not seem to be very effective with Korean children with autism and their parents is

 -­‐Issue  1    October  2011  -­‐    

                                                           New  book  available  from  Teachers  College  Press,  available  October  2011!   Leading for Inclusion: How Schools Can Build on the Strengths of All Learners Edited by Phyllis Jones, Janice R. Fauske, and Judy F. Carr

This book expands the notion of inclusion well beyond special education to include English language learners, students with refugee status, LGBTQ children, poor children, and other underrepresented populations. Employing real-world vignettes and up-to-date research findings, this hands-on resource provides strategies that

school leaders can employ to improve teaching and learning in their school or classroom. Contributors offer a wide variety of perspectives from the fields of testing and assessment, early education, elementary education, special education, educational leadership, and reading. Contributors: Rebecca Burns • Thomas Crisp • Jennifer Menon Mariano • Jody Lynn McBrien •

Tary L. Wallace • Julia M. White • G. Pat Wilson

redirecting. Redirecting refers to a method that can be used in a situation where an individual displays inappropriate behaviors and needs to be directed to pay attention to something else so that the inappropriate behavior could be replaced by a more appropriate one. A mother reported that when her child was requesting food, the therapist instructed her not to give food. As a result, the child started to hit himself. Still, the therapist did not allow her to give food. Instead, the therapist instructed her to redirect the child’s attention to something else. In the end, the parent had to give food to the child because they could not keep the child from hitting himself and redirecting did not work. One behavioral intervention strategy that Korean reported as very positive was providing praise when children engaged in

appropriate behaviors. Parents stated that after using this strategy, they were able to learn to recognize many appropriate behaviors that they did not notice before. Before interviewing these parents, I perceived behavioral interventions as effective ways of dealing with problem behaviors of individuals with autism and other developmental disabilities, regardless of cultural backgrounds. This is be, due to the research that shows behavioral intervention is an effective strategy in reducing problem behaviors and teaching appropriate behaviors. However, it seems that Korean parents did not believe some of the behavioral intervention strategies were very effective. The implication of this result is that behavioral intervention strategies need to be customized when they are applied to individuals with diverse cultural backgrounds.

               Inclusion  in  Our  Schools:  Why?  By  Ashleigh  Molloy,  Transformation  Education  Institute

 Inclusion. According to the Webster Dictionary, the meaning of the root word “include” is as follows: 1. contain, compromise; 2. put in total, a class, or the like; 3. allow to participate. The dictionary further clarifies that in this context, compromise emphasizes being made up of parts going together to make the whole. The word “inclusion” is defined as being included. So let’s apply this information in the education system. Inclusion means that students are in one class where each participates and comes together to make up

the whole. Thus, the argument is not whether we should have special needs students in our classes but rather that we must have them present because they are an integral component of a class. Simply stated, they are needed to make the whole. Why? On the most basic level, the answer is simple. If we view our classes as microcosms of our society, we must include students with special needs in our classes because people with special needs are members of our society. When children enter the school

 -­‐Issue  1    October  2011  -­‐    

system, they begin to learn and practice how to function within a community. For real learning to occur, it is essential that our class community duplicate as closely as possible that of the outside world and that our students are actively involved in the process. Students with special needs need to interact with typically developing students and typically developing students need to interact with students with special needs. If the answer is simple, then why has this not always been the case? Well, according to a popular line of thought which I share, the education system, as we know today, was first established as a response to the industrial revolution and its aftermath of needing to train people to fill jobs. One could argue that in an agrarian society children with special needs were integrated into everyday life according to their skills and abilities and that those around them filled the gaps and provided support where needed. With the advent of formal schooling, however, this way of life was replaced by segregating young people and placing them in an institution, often bound by rules, expectations, and goals. In comparison, this system was rigid and not malleable. The children with special needs could not fit in. The classrooms were little factories for learning, and if some “products” were broken, they were discarded. The special needs population was at odds with the evidence model of the Industrial Revolution. The fact that people did not protest is not surprising. After all, earlier in our history popular belief described women as not being able to suffer the rigor of thinking hard because the activity would cause them to “swoon”. African-Americans were segregated in schools because of their skin color.

However, we no longer hold on to those ideas as being valid. Today women, people of color as well as people with disabilities can no longer legally be discriminated against. Reality however, is different and acts of discrimination occur everyday on both a formal and informal basis. In reference to this absurd fact I would like to point out that children with special needs who attend a school with a traditional special education model receive a message that may be interpreted, as “You are not allowed to be in a regular classroom.” Sounds like discrimination to me. But I digress, back to the argument that we need students with special needs in a class in order to reflect our diverse society. I believe, that for maximum development to occur, for them to become well-rounded individuals, all children must have the opportunity to interact with, learn from and play with one another. Restricting children from doing so fractures the concept of wholeness. Inclusion is the obvious model. Children with special needs in their response to exclusion have a right to pose this question: “Why are we not allowed in your classroom?” Parents in particular are waiting in anticipation for an answer. Martin Luther King in his famous address spoke about change that included ensuring full citizenship for African-Americans. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color but by the content of their character.” Like Mr. King, I too have a dream, that the diversity among our students be respected and fully embraced in schools through the practice of inclusion across the nation.

 TASH  International  Issues  Committee  Member  Highlights   Dr. Phyllis Jones and Dr. Daphne Thomas, of the University of South Florida, presented, respectively, “Facilitative Leadership for the 21st Century Special School” and “Facilitating Cultural Empathetic Family Involvement” at the Schools Network International Special Schools Autumn Conference, in October 2011, in Warwick, UK.

Dr. Alberto Migliore, Research Associate, Institute for Community Inclusion at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, presented “People with Intellectual or Developmental Disabilities Would Prefer Individual Employment” at the Vermont Inclusion Institute: A Time for Change, in October 2011, in Burlington, VT.

 -­‐Issue  1    October  2011  -­‐    

International Issues Committee Co-Chair Dr. Ashleigh Molloy received the Toronto Association of Parents in Catholic Education (TAPCE) Lifetime Leadership in Catholic Education Award in December 2010, for his work with the Toronto Catholic School Board.

Dr. Eunhee Paik, of Kongiu National University (Korea), served as an academic executive staff member and moderator for the first plenary session on inclusion at the 20th Asian Conference on Intellectual Disabilities, which took place in February 2011, in Jeju Island, Korea. More than 15 countries

throughout Asia participated in this conference on research and various activities for parents and people with intellectual disabilities. Dr. Paik also presented, with Dr. ChangHo Kim, on “The Effects of Self-Determination Learning Model of Instruction on Vocational Achievement for High School Students with Mental Retardation.” As a team director for Brain Korea 21, an initiative of the Korean government, Dr. Paik worked with students of Kongiu National University to facilitate their participation in and presentations at the conference. Dr. Julia M. White, International Issues Committee Co-Chair and director of the Inclusive Education program at the University of Rochester, was invited to facilitate a session, “Towards measures to prevent and reverse segregation: Psychological testing regimes and segregation in special education,” at the Decade of Roma Inclusion Conference, Desegregating Education in Central and Eastern Europe: Inclusive Approach—Good Practice and the Way Forward in May 2011, in Prague, Czech Republic.

We  welcome  your  contributions!   Please contribute to the TASH International Issues Committee Newsletter! Submit articles you have written that highlight any work you have done, including inservices, professional development, advocacy work, or other activities—include pictures! Please send us information on conferences at which you have presented, books or articles that you have had published, or any other information that you think would relevant to the International Issues Committee or to TASH in general. We are looking forward to making this newsletter a regular part of the TASH International Issues Committee’s activities so that we can stay connected between annual meetings. We also hope that by sharing our work, partnerships and collaborative efforts can evolve.

L to R are “Best Buddies” Rocel Enverga, Dr. Ash, and Lindsey Molloy

TASH  International  Issues  Committee  Co-­‐Chairs  2010-­‐2011  Ashleigh Molloy Alan Spaulding Julia M. White  

TASH  International  Issues  Committee  Newsletter  Edited by Julia M. White