I’ve been looking for a book that goes into detail about child development. When R. had EI, the therapists spent a long time trying to get her to match pictures in a laminated version of the book Brown Bear Brown Bear. She was never interested. They tried several different books. Finally they changed to a 3D matching program using toys and she was interested and did well, moving quickly on to sorting. I asked why this was easier and they told me that 3D matching is an ability developed before 2D matching. I won’t get into my frustration over the wasted time. I would however like to find some resource that explains why one ability comes before another and how it is supposed to typically develop.
In February, when she had her assessment with the school department she could not (or in some cases would not) stack 6 blocks, do an insert puzzle, arrange rings in order on a post, or string beads. Now she can do all of these tasks, and enjoys doing some of them on her own, not just for a reinforcer. I wonder why are certain tasks part of an assessment, and what does mastery of each of them mean in terms of development? It seems to me that after she learned to match and play with some toys appropriately her receptive language improved. Is that a coincidence, or are they related?
I recently read the book How Children Learn by John Holt. It is an older book and not specifically about children with special needs. It did not actually answer my questions, but I do feel like I learned from reading it. I’m going to use this blog to store my notes about some of the reading I’m doing.
The main point that the author illustrates throughout the book is that children learn best when they are inspired and having fun, not when actually being taught something in a structured way. Mr. Holt writes How much people learn at any moment depends on how they feel at that moment about the task and their ability to do the task.
He does mention children with autism in one section and it is worth quoting. ...much has been said and written about autistic children, children who seem to have withdrawn into a private world of their own, who don’t have or want any contact with the outside world at all. Arguments rage about how best to treat them. The conventional wisdom still seems to be that for severely autistic children not much can be done; they can perhaps be trained to take physical care of themselves and meet minimal social requirements, but not much else. But there have been some astonishing “cures.” Barry Kaufman in his book Son Rise, describes one that he and his wife effected with their apparently hopeless autistic little boy. The point I want to make here is that they began their cure, and first began to establish some faint communication with their terribly withdrawn child, by making a point, for hours at a time if need be, of imitating everything that he did. This was the door or path by which they led him or persuaded him to come back into the everyday world.
No one can ever know exactly why this cure worked. But it feels right to me. If I felt that the world was so unpredictable and threatening and myself so powerless that I could not risk myself in that world, but had to make a tiny, safe private world of my own, that outside world might begin to seem less unpredictable and threatening and myself more powerful if I could make things happen in it.
All children want and strive for increased mastery and control of the world around them, and all are to some degree humiliated, threatened and frightened by finding out (as they do all the time) that they don’t have it. Perhaps autistic children need this control more and are far more frightened by not having it, and so, unlike most children, are not able to struggle patiently until they are able to get it, but instead, again unlike most children, must retreat from the big world around them into a private inner world of their own.
I think that repetitive behaviors, restricted interests and rituals can be seen as a symptom of this need for control in individuals with autism. I also think Mr. Holt would have liked Floortime.
The chapter on talking was interesting, I like what he writes about infants learning to speak:
I now feel strongly that much of the time infants are not trying to imitate sounds at all, but are actually trying to speak, that is to use sounds to convey wishes, feelings and meanings.
R. has been babbling for years now. The quality of the babbling has been evolving. Now it has all the sounds and intonations of sentences, there are sometimes words I can understand mixed in with babbling. She will look right at me and babble with an expression that seems to say that she is waiting for a response. I’ve thought for a long time that her babbling actually meant something to her. Mr. Holt also writes about children learning to write who write what looks like nonsense but actually consider themselves to be writing meaningful letters or stories or whatever. He wrote that when each of these children finally realized that no one could understand their writing they stopped and were quite upset about it. They all did eventually end up learning to read and write properly. I wonder how this applies to learning to speak and to a child with autism. I think that R. realizes that we don’t understand her when she babbles. When I do understand what she is saying she gets this expression of pure bliss at being understood. It makes me feel bad that I don’t understand more and I wonder if this discourages her from speaking more frequently.
Mr. Holt does attempt to answer this question in regards to typically developing children:
I suspect that early infant talkers… mean to send messages with their voices, as the big people around them obviously do, and they think that these messages are being received. Suddenly, perhaps around the age of one and a half or two, it dawns on them that most of their messages are not being received at all, and that they really can’t talk like other people, but must go through a lot of trouble to learn how. This may be one of the things that makes two year olds so touchy -they have just discovered that among all the things they don’t know how to do, they don’t know how to talk. They are bursting with things to say, needs and feelings, and awarenesses but have no way to say them.
We assume that since words are the shortest and simplest elements of language that we learn them first. But it is far more likely that we learn words last. First we learn the large idea of communication by speech, that all those noises that come out of people’s mouths mean something and can make things happen. Then from the tones of people’s voices and the contexts in which they speak we get a very general idea of what they are saying,
Reference: How Children Learn by John Holt. (Merloyd Lawrence, Delta/Seymour Lawrence New York 1982) Pgs 43, 50, 81, 93