Present: Kathy Thielen, Chris O’Brien, Carole Rayl, Nancy Johnston, Chris Terry, Mary Goodemote, Stuart Strothman, David Schoales , Mikaela Simms, Karen Saunders, Curtiss Reed, Andy Davis, Ron Stahley.
Location: BAMS conference room.
Minutes of October 7 accepted.
Discussed Laramie Project. That went really well. A fantastic project.
Meaningful inclusion. What is it? We went around and discussed it. Comments include: Inclusion when person being included has a dynamic relationship with the group—they’re heard, they participate, in addition to being there. When people have not made social accommodations, they are not full members of the group. Inclusion is not just the opportunity for someone to participate, but keeping content relevant for all members of group. Inclusion means treating people the same socially, making sure that they are in the circle if there is a circle, accessibility is considered—that means having a table the person can sit at, having space for the chair, having computer access.
We listened to a piece about “the least dangerous assumption” from 1984—meaning that “we can never be certain of what people are capable of—so to avoid grave consequences, we must assume that they have potential.” We looked at the concept of musical chairs, and discussed ways to play without music or chairs. We came up with ideas; and Kathy showed us how they regularly play in her class. We discussed the nature of group interaction with people with disabilities as a problem-solving activity to allow the greatest possible accessibility. It often requires an intervention by an adult to make the effort happen. Stuart spoke about several stand-alone activities from the PRIDE curriculum that take a problem solving approach to inclusion in different situations.
We discussed the concept of “partial inclusion.” We discussed limitations that individuals may have, and also, assumptions that others make about those limitations. We observed the button/recorder machine that Karen uses to allow nonverbal students to participate. The example of students who really want to participate—who fight over getting an eraser. Karen spoke about the students who help her with a wide variety of tasks, and really enjoy helping. It is about looking at kids development, not just physically but developmentally—to be aware of what they might expect at their age.
We raised the question, “when is it just a show, and when is it authentic participation?” One thought was that when watching, an observer can often tell if a person is engaged and/or invested in the activity, and that is relevant to the question.
We discussed UDL (Universal Design for Learning)—the concept that certain strategies allow everyone to participate—they are good for all learners, but some absolutely need them. The architectural concept is seminal—the idea that instead of an ugly, expensive ramp to let someone in the back door, everyone can use a large, beautiful ramp in the front of the building. Kathy explained the idea further, that people need to have the ability to use different modalities for learning—visual, auditory, or tactile, based on their abilities and learning style. Example—clapping can show numbers.
We decided to table the last two agenda items and explore UDL concepts further. We looked at some tools—wiffle balls that can hold pens, papers where the students mark what they’ve typed independently with a marker, using a machine to read a story, and sharing the activity by allowing one to turn the page, pinching grabber to turn pages, dice in a bottle, etc.
We looked further at accessibility on computers. Kathy showed us a site she uses which has a lot of accessible features. We also mentioned that the district website(s) could get a consultant to review accessibility issues on the site, and that Landmark College’s Institute for Research and Training can do that.
The Superintendent discussed the value of showing these tools, and the kids in action, to board members, to allow them to see the importance of some of these tools.
A number of people expressed that their minds were opened by some of the tools Kathy showed, and how important it is to show them to faculty, to open their eyes to the possibilities for inclusion in the classroom.
Kathy agreed to share links to site she showed today.
Curtiss talked about the preparation of various places in Vermont to deal with the approximately 26 percent of Vermonters that have some kind of disability. How do we make our town accessible to everyone?
Respectfully submitted by Stuart Strothman