Daily Excerpt: Understanding the Challenge of "No" for Children with Autism (McNeil) - No Running

 

Excerpt from Understanding the Challenge of "No" for Children with Autism (McNeil) -

Chapter 2

No Running

 

Raise your hand if you have found yourself plugging along on a multiple-choice test when you were stopped cold, or at least had to slow down and look more carefully at a question stated in the negative: “Which statement is NOT correct?”  Or worse yet, a double negative: “Which answer does not disagree with the following statement?”  Huh?  Okay, slow down. I’m looking for the incorrect answer and the answer that agrees with the statement. Why did the instructor have to be so tricky? As my hand is elevated along with yours, I admit to having gotten more than a few of these answers wrong throughout my education. In my groove, working steadily along, I was busy looking for the correct answers, not the incorrect ones, and I didn’t read the question carefully enough. As scholars, it is our responsibility to read carefully and decipher the negatives in order to respond correctly. The instructor may choose to help the learners by writing the questions more clearly but does not assume the responsibility to do so. Students must apply critical thinking skills and answer accurately if they do not want to suffer the consequences of a lower grade.

 

“No Running”

 

Lined-up in the hallway Miss Leaky’s primary school class of children with autism await their liberation to morning recess. Praising their cooperation, Mr. Compos says, “Okay, let’s go play.” The students are full of energy and begin jogging down the hall. Mr. Compos calls out, “No running.” With joyful expressions, their momentum boils up to a bounding stride. Mr. Compos repeats, “No running,” but they break into a sprint, bursting out onto the blacktop. 

At the play structure, Mr. Compos gathers the students together, explains that there is no running in the halls and imposes a one-minute break from playing as a consequence. The students complain about the unfairness of Mr. Compos, but are soon off to play. 

Later, before heading to P.E. Miss Leaky reminds the schoolmates, “We walk in the hallway.” She then instructs the line leader to guide the way to P.E. class, reminding, “Walking.” The gang begin walking steadily, then quicken their steps. Miss Leaky announces, “Walking,” and the friends slow again, cooperatively heading to their destination. 

Returning from outside, the pupils are hungry for lunch and anxious to get their meal items. Mr. Compos reiterates, “No running in the hallway.” The group walks excitedly then quickly expands into a trot. Mr. Compos broadcasts, “No running.” Their pace quickens. Mr. Compos states again, more firmly, “No running!” but increasing in speed, the set narrowly miss a collision with another group. In the schoolroom, feeling frustrated, Mr. Compos recounts the rules and consequences for running down the hall.  Ignoring their grievances, Mr. Compos assigns the class three minutes of quiet-time before being discharged to lunch. 

Finally gathered for the transition to the cafeteria, Miss Leaky stands facing the line and provides a reminder to the children, “Walking in the hall.” She leads the group, but the anxious students begin to speed past her. Mr. Compos warns, “No running,” with no effect. 

Miss Leaky then states, “Walking,” and the students reduce the swiftness of their gait until coolly ambling to the tables. 

Departing the lunchroom, the children make their way down the hall to the field for afternoon recess. Reminders of expectations and consequences are delivered. The youngsters start out obligingly. As their excitement bubbles up, they once again hasten their steps. Mr. Compos cautions, “No running,” yet the speed remains accelerated. 

When Miss Leaky states, “Walking,” the children slow their pace somewhat.

Miss Leaky reminds, “Nice walking.”

The group’s excitement quells and remains contained through the final length of the corridor. As soon as their feet meet the grass, Miss Leaky’s release, “Okay, running,” is answered by wild bursts of motion as students dart across the field.

Prior to leaving recess, the class lines-up once again, and Miss Leaky reemphasizes, “Walking.” The students begin traveling moderately, but quickly cultivate hurriedness. Mr. Compos’ warning, “No running,” proves ineffective. Copying Miss Leaky, Mr. Compos exclaims, “Walking,” and the students instantly reduce their momentum. 

Miss Leaky compliments the students, “Good walking,” which inspires a relaxed stroll approaching the classroom. Pleased, Mr. Compos gives everyone a high-five as they enter the room.

 

 

Breaking it Down

 

Communication

            No running, No jumping, No talking, No shoes – No shirt – No service.  Speaking in this style of negative phrasing is as common and ingrained as answering the telephone with, “Hello.” To the majority of society, the message is direct, concise, and typically easily understood. Unfortunately, children with autism struggle with deciphering statements requesting the negation of an action. While it is not impossible for these children to learn some regularly used negative statements, it takes more effort and exposure to the exact phrasing to produce understanding.

If we look carefully at the information provided by current researchers and practitioners of autism we could pinpoint some of the children’s receptive communication difficulties. Autism causes deficits, to varying degrees, in the ability to understand verbal sounds and attach meaning to them. Further, if the children do understand the individual spoken words, they may not be able to fully process strings of auditory information or words in sentences. Many children with autism will often be able to comprehend and respond to either the first word, or more likely the last word, of a sentence. It is my experience that children with autism most often respond to the very last thing they hear.

In the story above, Mr. Compos is calling out to the students, “No running,” and the students are only processing, “Running.” Therefore, they gleefully continue onward.  For the children, this situation is not unlike test takers answering questions written in the double negative form. Mr. Compos is requesting the negation of running and expecting the students to decipher this negation and translate it into the correct response. 

When speaking in a negation of action style, we are asking the recipient not only to process the sounds into meaningful concepts but also to employ critical thinking skills to decipher an indirect message. Further, if the children do understand the statement, “No running,” to mean cease the action, there is no information given that indicates what other action is expected. What is the request, “No running,” asking the student to do; skip, gallop, walk, tiptoe, crawl, stop? While the message may seem clear to the speaker, the receiving child with autism is often oblivious to the full implication of the statement. In this example, the students hold the responsibility for understanding the complicated message and are provided a consequence for getting it wrong. Mr. Compos repeatedly gives the students time-out for responding incorrectly to his instruction. 

 

Tell the students what to do versus what not to do.

Barbara Bloomfield

 

Miss Leaky’s approach provides the students a clear message of what to do instead of what not to do. Miss Leaky accepts the responsibility for choosing her vocabulary carefully to communicate at the comprehension level of the students. Miss Leaky’s statement, “Walking,” provided the class the exact action being requested and did so using only one clearly spoken word.

 

Supplementary Influences

It turns out that our brains are literally hardwired

to perform at their best not when they are negative or even neutral,

but when they are positive.

Shawn Achor

 

“Smile when you answer the phone,” is a piece of advice commonly found in training protocols for receptionists. The principle behind this advice is that smiling changes the position of the structures in the mouth in a manner that raises the tone of voice to a higher pitch. This higher pitch sounds pleasant and welcoming. In our story, as a side effect of using the single words expressing what to do, especially when using the form of present participle, “Walking,” Miss Leaky sounds more pleasant and less demanding. This change in tone inspires a pleasing affect that is received well by the students and by observers in the environment. In her book Presence, Amy Cuddy explains the findings of her research on how one’s body posture can have positive or negative effects on one’s mood. She shares that closed postures, such as arms folded across the body and head down, result in a more negative mood whereas open postures, such as arms out to the sides and head tipped upward, result in positive mood. Expanding upon this concept, I propose that the use of the word, “No,” when requesting the negation of actions can have a similar effect. The word, “No,” tends to create a closed facial posture. The lips are pursed in a closed, rounded position, the cheeks are draw in and forward and often the eyebrows are tipped inward and down towards the nose. I have noticed that the more my staff and I said, “No,” the more frustrated we became and the harsher our tone of voice sounded. Yet when we began using the positive what to do statements, our moods were more elevated. This may be due to the better response of the students, but it seems that the raising of the voice tone when saying the, “ing,” part of a request, like “Walking,” which ends in a smile, not only makes us sound more pleasant, but following Amy Cuddy’s line of thought, actually makes us feel more agreeable.   These positive feelings result in added patience and foster amiable interactions with the children. 

 

Relationship Dynamics:

When Mr. Compos was communicating in the universally common manner, “No running,” there was a domino effect of dissatisfaction and disconnection between the opposing parties. After the lack of response to his first request not to run, Mr. Compos may believe he is not being heard, and maintaining a neutral emotional state, attempt a repetition of his request. When, after the second request, the students respond opposite to Mr. Compos’ expectations, he becomes frustrated with what he perceives as the students’ willful disregard of his instruction. This changes his emotional state to a negative inclination. Mr. Compos then provides a consequence to the students for disobeying the rules and his commands. 

In response to Mr. Compos’ penalties, the students become upset by what they perceive as unfair punishment. In their perception, not only did they follow his instructions as they heard them, “Running,” but they did so by increasing their efforts each time and speeding up with each repeated instruction. The students find Mr. Campos’ behavior inconsistent, by first telling them to run then giving them a time-out for doing so. This perception develops confusion, negative feelings and distrust of Mr. Compos.   Distrust weakens the confidence of the children, and they begin to feel uncertain and anxious around Mr. Compos. The relationship lacks attunement and all parties suffer negative emotional effects.

Miss Leaky’s communication style provides meaning and inspires improvements in the children’s behavior. Her single word, “Walking,” tells the students what action is expected and requires the processing of only one commonly used word. The students and Miss Leaky feel confident in their interactions, as the communication between them has been perfectly aligned. Positive emotional reciprocity and attunement is achieved, and a strong relationship is reinforced.

When Mr. Compos realizes that Miss Leaky is having more success at influencing the student’s actions by using the positive statement, “Walking,”  Mr. Compos adjusts his verbiage and is pleasantly rewarded with compliance from the students. As Mr. Compos chooses to use vocabulary that is supportive of the needs of the children, the children become amenable in their obedience. They remain in a positive emotional state, feel confident in their response to his request, and remain in tune with Mr. Campos’ expectations. Consequentially, Mr. Compos obtains a positive emotional reward from communicating effectively which engenders a feeling of competence in his ability to supervise the students. Mr. Compos likewise enters a positive emotional state and shares this Supplementary Influence back with the students through his social reward of a high-five. Mr. Compos and the students experience a reciprocally reinforcing moment. If Mr. Compos continues to practice shifting his vocabulary style, his relationship with the students will improve immeasurably.

 

I know of no more encouraging fact

than the unquestionable ability of man to elevate his life

by conscious endeavor.

Henry David Thoreau

 

KOPS-FETHERLING INTERNATIONAL BOOK AWARD
LEGACY AWARD IN EDUCTION

READERS VIEWS LITERARY AWARD
SILVER AWARD
ADULT CLASSICAL NONFICTION

For more posts about McNeil and her books, including more excerpts, click HERE.

For more book excerpts, click HERE.

Sign up for the MSI Press LLC newsletter

Follow MSI Press on Twitter, Face Book, and Instagram. 

Interested in publishing with MSI Press LLC?

Check out information on how to submit a proposal.

Planning on self-publishing and don't know where to start?

Our author au pair services will mentor you through the process.

Interested in receiving a free copy of this or any MSI Press LLC book
 in exchange for reviewing a current or forthcoming MSI Press LLC book?
Contact editor@msipress.com.

Want an author-signed copy of this book?
Purchase the book at 25% discount (use coupon code FF25)
and concurrently send a written request to orders@msipress.com.

Want to communicate with one of our authors?
You can!
Find their contact information on our Authors' Pages.