Person-first Language and Sarcastic Teachers and Behaviorists

I hear administrators, and behavioral professionals mandate person first language but freely mock students in front of peers and teachers.

I am sick of it. Words matter.

This is how a lot of teachers in both general education and special education classrooms “communicate” with their students. Snide remarks abound. Direct answers are not provided to direct questions. Sarcasm from teachers is rampant, but the same behavior is not tolerated from students.

Sarcasm is never okay. When we are sarcastic with students it fits both the CDC definitions for relational and verbal bullying.

We are harming the child in front of their peers and we are intentionally denigrating them.

What is sad is that even the when teachers said no to using sarcasm, they managed to miss the point entirely. They avoid it because they may get in trouble or because famous education researchers like Robert Marzano are emphatic in his appeal to why sarcasm is never appropriate. It strikes me as puzzling that so many people defend using sarcasm in their day to day life as a form of humor, but then immediately turn and say it is never appropriate for a students to be sarcastic back to the teacher. It is a behavior that is a non-negotiable from students.

Source: Students Do Not Deserve Your Sarcasm – Why Haven’t They Done That Yet?

Person-first language is problematic:

“People-first” language is meant to divide, it is meant to demean, it is meant to dehumanize, it is meant to pathologize, and yet, it is meant, as I said before, to make its users feel good. In that way it is ultimately destructive because it covers up the crimes.

Only when people get to choose their own labels will we get anywhere toward building an equitable culture.

If we convert horrid prejudices into pleasant sounding phrases, we diffuse those prejudices as an issue.

Source: Using “Correct Language” And “People First” by Ira David Socol – Bowllan’s Blog

I’m autistic, not a person with autism. Autistic is my identity.

I’m a disabled person, not a person with disabilities. Disabled is my identity.

Identity first language is common among social model self-advocates. When hanging out in social model, neurodiversity, and self-advocacy communities, identity first is a better default than person first. Every autistic and disabled person I know uses identity first language. The words autistic and disabled connect us with an identity and a community. They help us advocate for ourselves.

Disability’s no longer just a diagnosis; it’s a community.

There’s a language gap between self-advocates and the institutions that claim to represent us. There’s a gap between parents and their #ActuallyAutistic and disabledkids. There’s a generational gap in the disability movement. This is confusing for those trying to be allies. The articles below offer perspective and advice on identity first and person first language from self-advocates. At the end, I collect tweets from autistic and disabled self-advocates in a Twitter moment. Witness and respect these perspectives.

Source: Identity First – Ryan Boren

This is autistic life in the person-first cultures of education:

We navigate systems stacked against us to get access to what amounts to dog training-that dog trainers know better than to use-and a segregated “special” track through our systems that pathologically pathologizes difference and fails to connect with the communities it helps marginalize.

The specialists that serve this “special” track aren’t so much specialized in the lives and needs of neurodivergent and disabled people (managing sensory overwhelm, avoiding meltdown and burnout, dealing with ableism, connecting with online communities, developing agency and voice through self-advocacy) as they are specialized in deficit and medical models that pathologize difference and identity.

So heartbreakingly many can’t even bring themselves to use our language or educate parents about our existence. After autistic students age out of our care, we erase them again as adults.

Source: Neurodiversity in the Classroom – Ryan Boren

We hear the “abuse them now to prepare them for later abuse” line regularly at school. It is used to justify bad practices not at all in touch with the “real world”.

More than a few teachers have notified me that by being sarcastic – particularly with autistic students – they are preparing the students for sarcastic people in the “real world” and these teachers ardently refuse to “coddle” these autistic kids because they demonstrate difficulty with recognizing or learning social cues.

Source: Students Do Not Deserve Your Sarcasm – Why Haven’t They Done That Yet?

“Coddle” suggests a lot about the people saying it. It suggests they don’t have a structural understanding of our society. It suggests their framing is deficit ideology and meritocracy myths. It suggests they’re out of touch with the workplace and the future of work.

They’re not interested in designing for real life. They’re not allies.

Compassion is not coddling, and sarcasm from teachers and therapists isn’t comedy.

There’s been a lot of talk, of late, about laughter. Laughter as power. Laughter as luxury. Laughter as empathy. Laughter as beauty. Laughter as philosophy. Laughter as complicity. Laughter as division. The current political moment has been in one way a lesson in how easily jokes can be weaponized: Jokes can win elections. Jokes can insist that, despite so much evidence to the contrary, lol nothing matters. Jokes can contribute to the post-truth logic of things. They can lighten and enlighten and complicate and delight; they can also mock and hate and lie and make the world objectively worse for the people living in it-and then, when questioned, respond with the only thing a joke knows how to say, in the end: “I was only kidding.”

Source: Trump Mocks Christine Blasey Ford; The Rally Loves It – The Atlantic

“We can hear the spectacle of cruel laughter throughout the Trump era.”

Source: The Cruelty Is the Point – The Atlantic

Suddenly, even the most powerful people in society are forced to be fluent in the concerns of those with little power, if they want to hold on to the cultural relevance that thrust them into power in the first place. Being a comedian means having to say things that an audience finds funny; if an audience doesn’t find old, hackneyed, abusive jokes funny anymore, then that comedian has to do more work. And what we find is, the comedians with the most privilege resent having to keep working for a living. Wasn’t it good enough that they wrote that joke that some people found somewhat funny, some years ago? Why should they have to learn about current culture just to get paid to do comedy?

Source: The price of relevance is fluency

Equity Literacy in Diversity and Inclusion Statements

Our diversity and inclusion statements need to get structural, get social, and get equity literate. Use them to directly challenge the meritocracy myths, deficit ideologies, and politics of resentment that are toxic to culture, teams, and collaboration.

I evaluate D&I statements by the extent to which they acknowledge and represent these ideas:

The Direct Confrontation Principle: There is no path to equity that does not involve a direct confrontation with inequity. There is no path to racial equity that does not involve a direct confrontation with interpersonal, institutional, and structural racism. “Equity” approaches that fail to directly confront inequity play a significant role in sustaining inequity.

The “Poverty of Culture” Principle: Inequities are primarily power and privilege problems, not primarily cultural problems. Equity requires power and privilege solutions, not just cultural solutions. Frameworks that attend to diversity purely in vague cultural terms, like the “culture of poverty,” are no threat to inequity.

The Prioritization Principle: Each policy and practice decision should be examined through the question, “How will this impact the most marginalized members of our community?” Equity is about prioritizing their interests.

The “Fix Injustice, Not Kids” Principle: Educational outcome disparities are not the result of deficiencies in marginalized communities’ cultures, mindsets, or grittiness, but rather of inequities. Equity initiatives focus, not on fixing marginalized people, but on fixing the conditions that marginalize people.

Source: Basic Principles for Equity Literacy

With this in mind, my purpose is to argue that when it comes to issues surrounding poverty and economic justice the preparation of teachers must be first and foremost an ideological endeavour, focused on adjusting fundamental understandings not only about educational outcome disparities but also about poverty itself. I will argue that it is only through the cultivation of what I call a structural ideology of poverty and economic justice that teachers become equity literate (Gorski 2013), capable of imagining the sorts of solutions that pose a genuine threat to the existence of class inequity in their classrooms and schools.

Source: Poverty and the ideological imperative: a call to unhook from deficit and grit ideology and to strive for structural ideology in teacher education

Social Support, Well-being, and Quality of Life Among Autistic People

Great piece from the American Academy of Pediatrics on how inclusion, acceptance, agency, self-advocacy, and responsive parenting/teaching support adaptive functioning, language acquisition, subjective well-being, and transition to adulthood. The findings align nicely with social model self-advocacy.

Selected passages:

I challenge the validity and utility of functioning labels for autism and the interpretation of the “autism spectrum” as a linear continuum. Social support may mediate functioning, because individuals with initially lower skills may experience more benefits from enriched social environments, such as parental input for language growth and cognitive development from inclusive educational settings. Furthermore, subtler manifestations of autism increase individuals’ risk of active peer rejection, loss of formal supports as they transition into adulthood, and distress. Thus, in this review, I provide support for the notion of autism as a cloudy constellation of uneven skills and high within-person variability, with performance contingent on the quality of social experiences and support well-suited for individual abilities or potential and needs.

Self-advocates have organized the neurodiversity movement to reclaim autism as a part of identity (eg, using identity-first language such as “autistic person,” as in the case of the author, rather than person-first language such as “person with autism”) and support civil rights. We argue that social environments contribute substantially to disability and seek quality of life, defined in terms of “objective” factors of adaptive functioning, such as independent living and employment, as well as in terms of subjective well-being, which requires self-determination to play as active a role as possible in making decisions to have the experiences one wants. Yet we argue against normalization and “cure,” in part because many autistic traits can function in neutral or positive ways, although other people may misunderstand or stigmatize atypical behaviors. Indeed, the following narrative review developed from empirical evidence replicated by independent research teams argues against a linear relationship between autism symptoms and impaired functioning, across developmental periods and in multiple domains of both “objective” quality of life and in subjective well-being. In the following syntheses, I suggest that effective social support and subjective well-being mediate whether autistic people achieve a high quality of life.

Responsive parenting (eg, parenting that follows children’s focus of attention and labels objects of interest while allowing the child to take the lead) contributes to young autistic children’s language development, particularly among those who need it most: those with lower levels of expression. Although the same principle applies in typical development, responsive caregiving and input may especially benefit language learning for autistic children, particularly for those who have more difficulty responding to others’ attention. Parents’ strategies to synchronize their behavior in response to their autistic child’s, such as matching his or her pace, may drive language gains from joint parent-child engagement through encouraging the child to initiate interactions, which may especially benefit the children who have the most difficulty producing their own goal-directed actions in reaction to others’ movements. This aligns well with the advice of autism rights movement founder Sinclair, in a foundational essay primarily for parents, to “let your child teach you a little of her language, guide you a little way into his world” as a means of helping the child adapt to the dominant culture and for the well-being of the family.

Instead, higher autism severity, as assessed by the parents’ questionnaire-based report, sometimes inversely relates to their acceptance of their child’s autism, which suggests that subjective perception rather than empirically demonstrated factors may drive acceptance. An increase in autism symptoms over time also relates to more parental acceptance of a child’s autism, likely because of a lowered perception of the possibility for the child to outgrow his or her challenges.

Early intervention delivered in inclusive as opposed to segregated preschool settings predicts higher IQ in elementary school, particularly for those with initially greater social and adaptive behavior impairments. In addition, higher levels of educational inclusion relate to better functioning for autistic adolescents and adults, beyond the effects of demographic and individual characteristics. Furthermore, autistic adolescents with intellectual disability had better academic performance in inclusive versus segregated classrooms, likely in significant part because they received more structured instruction time and their educational plan had greater focus on applied skill development (as contrasted with rote procedural goals). These benefits of inclusion appear driven in part by higher expectations based in confident understanding of needs, more naturalistic and responsive teaching methods as opposed to behavioral management, and access to typically developing peers.

An autism-typical pattern of poor adaptive functioning relative to IQ tends to rise with greater age and IQ, and autistic young adults as a group tend to have lower employment rates than their peers with intellectual disabilities.

Source: Social Support, Well-being, and Quality of Life Among Individuals on the Autism Spectrum | SUPPLEMENT ARTICLES | Pediatrics