The Hidden Potential of Autistic Kids: What intelligence tests might be overlooking
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-hidden-potential-of-autistic-kids/From the Scientific American
The Hidden Potential of Autistic Kids
What intelligence tests might be overlooking when it comes to autism
Nov 30, 2011 |By Rose Eveleth
The average child will score around the same percentile for all these tests, both verbal and nonverbal. But an autistic child will not. Isabelle Soulieres, a researcher at Harvard University, gave a group of autistics both WISC and the Raven test to measure the difference between the two groups. Although she expected a difference, she was surprised at just how big the gap was. On average, autistic students performed 30 percentile points better on the Raven test than on WISC. Some kids jumped 70 percentile points. "Depending on which test you use, you get a very different picture of the potential of the kids," she says. Other studies have confirmed this gap, although they found a smaller jump between tests.
The high functioning autistic children, with the least severe version of the disability, were not the only ones to score higher. Soulieres conducted a study recently at a school for autistic children considered intellectually disabled. Using the Raven test, she found that about half of them scored in the average range for the general population. "Many of those who are considered low-functioningif you give them other intelligence tests, you will find hidden potential," she says. "They can solve really complex problems if you give them material that they can optimally process."
What this means, she says, is that schools are underestimating the abilities of autistic children all across the spectrum. The widespread use of the WISC in schools has helped set expectations of autistic kids too lowassuming that they will not be able to learn the same things that the average child can. Based on the test results, people come to the conclusion that autistic children cannot learn, when perhaps they do not learn the same way other people do.
This hidden potential was recently acknowledged by Laurent Mottron, a psychiatrist at the University of Montreal. In an article in the November 3 issue of Nature, he recounts his own experience working with high-functioning autistic people in his lab, which showed him the power of the autistic brain rather than its limitations. Mottron concludes that perhaps autism is not really a disease at allthat it is perhaps just a different way of looking at the world that should be celebrated rather than viewed as pathology.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-hidden-potential-of-autistic-kids/
Nitram
(22,913 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)This year, as part of the test, the woman delivering the questions asked him, "You find out someone is getting married. What is an appropriate question to ask them?"
My brother's answer: "What kind of cake are you having?"
The proctor shook her head. No, she said, that's not a correct answer. Try again. He furrowed his brow in the way we have all learned to be wary ofit is the face that happens before he starts to shut downand said, "I don't have another question. That's what I would ask." And that was that. He would not provide her another question, and she would not move on without one. He failed that question and never finished the test.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-hidden-potential-of-autistic-kids/
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)be said for providing people on the spectrum with a declarative statement as opposed
to the incessant question based, like in this case..one such statement could have been,
I don't know what you know or think about marriage...do not repeat anything for 30-40
seconds.
These kids more so than neurotypical kids need to time to process and when done
so without the question based framework, they will surprise you more often than
not. Meaning, you're more likely to get a sense of the depth they comprehend
the social meaning of what you're trying to measure. They also begin to be the
one to ask questions..which opens up their minds for learning.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)when tolerance and patience should do the job. sadly, many teachers exhibit neither.
perhaps my impatience stems from not having had proper resources pushed my way growing up. as one of the "smart" kids, I didn't need any extra support.
that said I'm not sure why we need to consider autism as a disability when it comes along with its own set of specific strengths. for example facility with music or mathematics.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)redruddyred
(1,615 posts)my friend who was a child prodigy has researched the problem in some detail.
Igel
(35,374 posts)And there are G/T programs that require special training to deal with the social, academic, developmental, and emotion needs of G/T kids.
Simply dumping either in the mainstream classroom without support is a horrible idea. However, there are far more lawsuits "protecting" developmentally challenged kids and those on the spectrum than there are protecting G/T kids. Momma bears viciously protect those they think are somehow disabled. They fight much less hard for the strange kid that they themselves may not understand.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)tear 'em down rather than build us up.
but you just described my family dynamic succesfully; good for you.
it's not only teachers who are stupid, it's parents too. how can we have a functioning democracy when there are so many stupid people? full steam ahead for high tech, but not a second thought spared for social issues. charlie chaplin was right.
demigoddess
(6,645 posts)What they are taught about handicapped children is sometimes, at least when my daughter was in school, out of the dark ages. they never listen to parents and are dismissive of any success with kids that doesn't come from them. The whole experience of special ed was a nightmare for most of my daughter's school years. I had much better experience with people who did not have a degree in special ed. but were just 'trainers' or just mothers. but then at one school parents were not allowed to talk to each other and exchange stories. They were afraid we would tell on the teachers and then they would get sued.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)that I find it hard to argue that they deserve more support. my experience with them has been either that they were stupid and incompetent or powerhungry and cruel. nevertheless, I've met some very good and dedicated ones, just not where I went.
perhaps they were simply burnt out; I ran lessons outside of the public system and found that I really resented it after a few years. mostly because I was so overworked and underpaid.
but then at one school parents were not allowed to talk to each other and exchange stories.
wait, that was like a law? geez I feel like our public funds could be used much better than that!
demigoddess
(6,645 posts)but then at one school parents were not allowed to talk to each other and exchange stories.
wait, that was like a law? geez I feel like our public funds could be used much better than that!
It was in parent meetings with the teachers, similar to PTA, and they would call all the teachers out and have the parents of only one class. So they out numbered us 2 to 1. Then if two parents started talking to each other they would be interrupted by the teachers saying "I need to ask you a question" or something like it. But we were never allowed to be alone and talk. We were not allowed to ask about other students. (Privacy enforcement) etc.
PS. I have also had awful experience with teachers in the gifted programs. You would not believe the stories I could tell you about what went on in my kids' gifted programs. The teachers did not understand how to teach gifted/advanced/smart students either.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)was this something other parents noticed as well? (I guess you wouldn't know, would you)
demigoddess
(6,645 posts)One mother clued me into one thing. My son was constantly terrorized by one student that was placed right up next to his desk for years. One mother told me all the teachers were scared to discipline him in any way because his parents were rich and might sue. This mother volunteered at the school, so she knew.
Once the 4th grade gifted class teacher was away on illness, and the substitute told me in parent teacher meeting that the kids were being held back in math because they did not want to supply them with 7th grade math books in grade school. It was a logistics thing.
Once I tried to tell my gifted kid's teacher what level my son was reading at. Totally uninterested, she ran off to the school library with the excuse to see if they had books like that in the elementary school library. It was a young adults/teenage level book. They would not put those books in the school library.
Not to mention homework that was just makework to keep the kids busy and was no where near the level they were reading at. Another child was placed in reg math class but then put up to the high level math class just for the purpose of taking their tests at the end of school, so they could have a better average. Then moved back to average math class. My child was more than equal to the higher math class, but placed in a lower one because we were not expected to be in this school more than a year or two. (military family). those are the ones I can tell without going into horrendous detail.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)not that that's much worse.
I'm with the libertarians on this one: when the public school system sucks bad enough that it becomes an impediment to proper development, you need to have viable alternatives.
it sounds like there's no accountabilty, none at all. and like with any industry ever, people are more concerned with keeping their jobs rather than doing them properly.
not that I think the answer is breaking up the unions, either.
demigoddess
(6,645 posts)in special ed, it seemed the kids were being hit by aides. I heard a slap one time, but we were only allowed to look in on spec ed classes with previous notice to the teachers that you would never be able to see it. And the kids could not talk, so could not report abuse. They put paper over all the windows in the class rooms so no one could look in. Tell me that is okay.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)did you contact child services with your suspicions?
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)but yeah, abusing disabled people is way effing easy.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)I was considered very slow when I was in school. Kids made fun of my lisp, so I did not like to speak up in class, and holding a pencil like everyone else made my hand hurt so I had to write slow to make my handwriting legible so I could never finish a test. I used to fall asleep in class all the time My parents were advised that I should be left back. They said I was a girl, so it was not necessary that I be the best student. The teachers were not mean, they liked me and treated me "special". They just did not tutor me. Then one day, I had a friend who was in advanced classes, but she had trouble doing the work. So we would work together, and I would have to read ahead in the book to help my friend pass math. Then one day we were all given a state wide math test, My friend in her advanced class and me in my "slow" class. And I got the top score in the school. My math teacher was stunned, I did problems that we were not taught yet. and then she became my biggest advocate. She concluded my school problems were from being bored and pushed to get me placed better in the school and be given the help. The teachers that passed me along were not bad or uncaring, they just did not expect anything like that. Were there a few not good teachers, maybe, but you have to consider what they are taught to expect, and how they are taught to teach. When I was 55 I was diagnosed as having severe ADHD after I had a physical breakdown due to stress. Who knew?
All the rote testing and expected answers makes the teachers less effective, expectations can prejudice them. They are humans with flaws. One of the things that made going to school during the civil rights era, is seeing the light go on in some teachers as they changed their approach to black students. Expectations, what they were taught, personal ignorance, all being challenged. If all your teachers were bad, they were probably required to be 'bad' by the administration.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)hollysmom
(5,946 posts)my father wanted me to be a secretary, ha ha . They thought college was for their sons - in life's irony, my sister and I graduated from colleges, started our own successful businesses and my brothers worked in factories because they could not wait to have money for cars and girls. duh.They did not diagnose attention deficit in those days, thankfully, their grandchildren all got the diagnosis and the special attention they needed and are all thriving. I lucked out to get a manager who taught me about making lists early in jobs, as did my sister. Plus we were in very ordered jobs, or jobs that worked better the less disordered you were, me in computers, my sister in accounting. before cross reference lists in compilers, I alphabetized my working storage, ha ha , It really helped and the only others that did it I knew were ones who saw what I was doing, although I am sure others discovered it early as well.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)but I think opportunities have changed since even the last decade, certainly in the last 30 years. it's not so easy to make it on your own anymore.
I didn't get diagnosed with ADD until I was 20... that's far too late. parents never realized that "try harder" wasn't an option, I just couldn't get my mind stay on task.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)I try and help this generation, but I am a bit depressed by the ignorance i see in mt age equivalent tea party fox watching friends. They are not bad people, but damn,they are dumb
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)yeah I hear back in the day all LD fell under the umbrella of "dunce".
jmowreader
(50,567 posts)I assume "when is the baby due?" falls into the "unacceptable" category.
Crash2Parties
(6,017 posts)And it's context local to subcultures, too. Imagine if the tester was Southern Baptist and the child being tested had gay parents. "Marriage" is such a hot-button issue.
Personally, I think the cake question was completely legit & good for him for sticking with it. I can't tell you how often we find questions in our kids' homework where as adults we know the "correct" answer and recognize that it's near impossible to get it from the question asked due to careless wording. I'd hoped the pseudo-science of testing had advanced since I studied it in school, sadly that is not the case.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I have been wracking my brain trying to figure out what question you are supposed to ask. I think the cake question is a good one. I can't think of a better question to ask. I will probably use this if I ever find out someone is getting married.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)the type of cake may swing the decision if I want to attend.
ps. I thin it was probably something I don't care about like when is the date. I would never ask anyone that, I might ask, to whom? My niece told me she was engaged, and I asked "Seriously?" ha ha
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)about the decision to attend. I can't think of a better way to make that decision. I don't care about weddings and things like that either. I like Holidays, but mostly I think its a lot of ado about nothing. For Christmas all I really need is the lights. I like lights a lot.
dickthegrouch
(3,184 posts)"Strawberry shortcake, what else might you want to know about the wedding" and a series of similar questions until they get an acceptable answer. It might blow the timing to hell, but they'd have a much better view of the thought process of the test subject by the end of it.
The tester/proctor failed in the example, not the test taker.
jmowreader
(50,567 posts)I can think of a TON of "acceptable" answers to that question, if the person asking is an adult - who's the lucky (insert gender of person the betrothed would marry), what does this person do for a living, does this person have a nice house, when is the wedding, where is the wedding, what should I wear to it, what do you want as a gift, where are you going on honeymoon?
And I can think of a few that aren't quite as acceptable, like "you've been married nine times already, what the hell is the point of doing it again?" or "how is (insert gender) in bed?"
If someone hasn't been schooled in all the social graces, a question about cake is quite good. What does a kid really know about weddings? You ride in the back seat of the car for a whole day to get somewhere you didn't want to go, live in a motel room that smells bad, wear clothes you don't like, have to sit in a chair for an hour being good so you won't mess up your clothes while your mom is staring at herself in the mirror, sit in a church for a very long time with a lot of grown-ups you don't know, listen to boring music with no words, watch people stand at the altar while some guy talks to them. They kiss. They walk back up the aisle while the men clap and the women cry. Then you get to go to a party and eat cake. And that, my friends, is what weddings mean to nine-year-old boys.
But come on: This test asks little kids to know the name of the person who wrote a 65-year-old play they don't teach in grade school. How is a child going to know who wrote Death of a Salesman? I had to think about it for a minute, and I'm almost as old as that book is. If you want the name of an author to see how smart a grade schooler is, ask them who wrote The Cat in the Hat.
Next atrocity: the word "scissor." Do they want the kid to say "scissor" means cut or "scissor" means "two items rotate in an X-pattern around a center point by applying pressure to the outside of the items"? Or does it mean "a computer at the National Security Agency whose presence was disclosed by Edward Snowden in his first revelation?"
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)if the boy was a little bit older. But of course someone who is by definition not neurotypical is likely to give less than typical answers. So a question like this is no more a measurement of cognitive ability than asking if they are more attracted to girls or boys and then defining the one who answers the same sex as themselves as having less cognitive ability than the one who answers the opposite. Question like the one put forward by the proctor simply measure sameness with the assumption that sameness shows superior intelligence.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)I missed it myself except for this excerpt (below) from the public comments segment and one other.
OP: The Hidden Potential of Autistic Kids: What intelligence tests might be overlooking
IACC Workshop on Under-Recognized Co-Occurring Conditions in ASD
Or, paraphrasing, "The Hidden Potential of Autistic Kids: Whatintelligencetests might be overlooking" in the medical realm (co-existing medical conditions with the potential for recovery). Oddly, or maybe horrifyingly, no pediatric gastroenterologists were among the bunch of speakers, although I could be wrong since I haven't listened the the full session yet.
PLEASE CHECK IT OUT:
We are the experts #hearthiswell
Published on Sep 23, 2014
Thinking Moms Revolution
IACC Workshop on Under-Recognized Co-Occurring Conditions in ASD
Air date: Tuesday, September 23, 2014, 8:45:00 AM
Time displayed is Eastern Time, Washington DC Local
Views: Total views: 498, (494 Live, 4 On-demand)
Runtime: 06:55:45
https://iacc.hhs.gov/events/index.shtml
https://iacc.hhs.gov/events/2014/co-occurring-conditions-workshop-agenda-sept23.shtml
https://iacc.hhs.gov/events/2014/co-occurring-conditions-workshop-biosketches-sept23.shtml
https://iacc.hhs.gov/events/2014/co-occurring-conditions-workshop-materials-sept23.shtml
https://iacc.hhs.gov/events/2014/co-occurring-conditions-workshop-comments-sept23.shtml
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)by Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg
Representing Difference as Pathology: An Example from Simon Baron-Cohens The Science of Evil
August 23, 2012 at 12:09 pm
I find it very painful to write about the work of Simon Baron-Cohen. Ive done so extensively in the past, and this spring, I decided to take a break from it. But there is a passage in his latest book, The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty, that has haunted me since I read it last year, and I feel the need to explore why. Ive critiqued the book before, but somehow couldnt touch this passage until now, and I think I understand why: The passage doesnt simply speak volumes about how others view autistic people in particular, or disabled people in general, but constitutes a particularly telling example of the ways in which our society pathologizes difference and blames people outside the norm for the treatment we receive.
In Chapter 4: When Zero Degrees of Empathy is Positive, Baron-Cohen makes the extreme, pejorative, and wholly incorrect assertion that, for people on the autism spectrum, Other peoples behavior is beyond comprehension, and empathy is impossible, and concludes that autistic people have zero degrees of empathy (Baron-Cohen 2011, 117). He attempts to mitigate the impact of these statements by saying that autistic people are zero-positive because, in his estimation, our systemizing skills enable us to build such things as elaborate moral systems (my elaborate moral system is built on empathy, thank you, but I digress) and cutting-edge technology (for which I have no aptitude whatsoever, thank you, but I digress) (Baron-Cohen 2011, 122-123). Despite this apparent attempt to redeem us from the lack-of-empathy stigma, Baron-Cohen presents the story of a 52-year-old man named Michael, who has Aspergers Syndrome, as representative of the lives of autistic people, and he characterizes Michael as almost robotic: controlling, anti-social, utterly logic-minded, and incapable of understanding other peoples feelings or of having any emotional responses of his own (Baron-Cohen 2011, 96-100).
To illustrate his view that autistic people are on the zero end of the empathy scale, Baron-Cohen begins by writing about Michaels childhood. I find two things rather fascinating about Baron-Cohens rendering: 1) His descriptions of Michaels childhood do not illustrate Michaels lack of empathy, but the lack of empathy of the children around him, and 2) the wholesale lack of empathy on the part of normal children goes entirely unremarked. He writes of Michael:
Even as a child he found social situations confusing and stressful. He didnt play with other children in the playground, was never invited to their birthday parties, was not picked to be on their team. He avoided the playground by going to the bottom of the playing field at primary school alone and counting blades of grass. In the winter when it snowed, he became obsessed with the structure of snowflakes, wanting to understand why each one was different. Other children in his class couldnt understand what he was talking about because in their eyes all snowflakes looked the same. Although the teacher had told all the class that every snowflake is unique, it seemed that he was the only person in the class who could actually see the small individual differences in the snowflakes. The other children in the class teased him, calling him snowflake brain. (Baron-Cohen 2011, 97-98)
Its difficult, at first, to grasp all that is wrong with this passage, because Baron-Cohen is uttering entirely prejudicial things in a very kind and reasonable tone. Lets start at the beginning: He suggests that a sign of Michaels lack of empathy is that he didnt play with other children, wasnt asked to their parties, and was the proverbial last kid picked for the team. Baron-Cohen seems to take it entirely for granted that Michael is at fault, and that it was quite natural that the other children would reject him because of his as-yet-undiagnosed disability. He gives not the slightest nod to the idea that perhaps Michael didnt play with the other children because they themselves were unempathetic because they would not tolerate his confusion and stress, because they rejected him based on his difference, because they shut him out from every birthday party, and because they didnt want him on their teams.
After continual social rejection, what exactly is wrong with a child running to the other end of the playing field alone and amusing himself as best he can? Counting blades of grass is not a normative response, but that doesnt make it wrong; in fact, I can certainly understand why a stressed-out autistic kid who is being rejected for reasons he cant fathom would try to calm himself with a counting ritual. Given the other possibilities for dealing with wholesale social rejection lashing out in anger at others or doing harm to oneself an obsession with grass seems to me an entirely non-retaliatory response, and says quite a bit about Michaels gentleness. Not surprisingly, given the purpose of his narrative, the author never remarks upon this gentleness.
What I find most heart-wrenching, however, is the story of Michaels fascination with the unique structure of each snowflake, and the ways in which the other children respond to it. Michaels attentiveness to details that most people miss, and his love for the small and intricate beauty of the natural world, are deeply moving to me. The other children do not see what Michael sees and they do not understand his fascination, but Baron-Cohen does not tar this lack of understanding as a lack of empathy, despite the fact that he considers Michaels inability to see what other children see, and his lack of interest in what gives them happiness, as prima facie evidence that Michael has an empathy disorder. Im not sure on what logical basis a scientist could make such a subjective, one-sided, prejudicial assessment, but then again, its passages like this one that long ago caused me to give up on the idea of objectivity altogether.
Perhaps the most distressing part of the entire passage is the way in which Baron-Cohen assesses the childrens response: He writes that they teased Michael by calling him snowflake brain (Baron-Cohen 2011, 98). I take issue with Baron-Cohens use of the word teased. The children were not teasing Michael; they were calling him names and laughing at him. Teasing is good-natured fun between people of relatively equal power. There isnt a hint of equal power here, and there is nothing good-natured about making fun of a beautiful thing that brings joy to an isolated, rejected kid. At best, several other children laughing at their defenseless classmate constitutes harassment; at worst, its bullying. Anyone who has ever been laughed at as a form of dismissal and exclusion knows exactly what Im talking about. These are the kinds of microaggressions that accumulate to create self-doubt and self-hatred in those who are the targets of them. But Baron-Cohen does not seem to consider laughing at a vulnerable kid evidence of a lack of empathy in the normal children. In fact, he seems to imply that if Michael had any empathy for his classmates, he would have known better than to talk endlessly about snowflakes.
While Baron-Cohens much-cherished and erroneous belief that autism is an empathy disorder is the reason for the inclusion of this story in his book, the framing of the story is indicative of a much larger problem in writing about disability and other forms of difference: Non-normative people become responsible for our own social rejection. The accusations launched at Michael and, by extension, at us that were incapable of normal human feelings and that were trapped in our own worlds could just as easily be launched at those who reject us. How many normal people have enough human feeling to befriend and understand non-normative people? How many normal people are trapped in their own normal worlds, without any consciousness of what it means to be non-normative? The accusations of lack of caring and lack of engagement adhere to the ones who are different. Those in the majority are simply acting normally by doing all the things that, when non-normative people do them, are considered evidence of pathology.
These kinds of accusations are a form of victim-blaming that have no place in a civilized society. That people who consider themselves objective engage in it is an indication of how deeply entrenched a habit of mind it is.
References
Baron-Cohen, Simon. The Science of Evil: On Empathy and the Origins of Cruelty. New York, NY: Basic Books, 2011.
http://www.disabilityandrepresentation.com/2012/08/23/representing-difference-as-pathology/
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I am not like other girls. I don't fit neatly into the spectrum, but 3 people have openly wondered if I do. Growing up adults targeted me as a "special" case. They wanted me make me into a social person and even worse they wanted to stifle my curiosity. It wasn't just one adult it was most of them. My grandparents are the only people I can remember who weren't concerned about me being a loner and who would answer my questions without irritation and who didn't get bent when I would rather read than interact with people.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)can diagnose a patient. But it might be a basis to see how well one compares with those who have some form of ASD. It is considered one of the better test of its sort.
http://aspietests.org/raads/index.php
Here is an online forum some might find interesting. It's kind of like DU for Asperger's/Autism
http://www.wrongplanet.net/forums.html
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)So I have a lot in common with Aspies even if I don't actually have it.