[Arizona-students] "You Don't Have To"

[Arielle Silverman]

Hi all,

Below is an article written by Carrie Gilmer, the president of the
Minnesota Parents of Blind Children, who has a blind son who is in
high school. The article refers to a situation that all of us are all
too  familiar with as students: where a teacher, DSS professional,
etc. exempts us from doing assignments or even entire components of
the curriculum, merely because we are blind. What are the implications
of this kind of beneficent treatment? Beneath the outer appearance of
promoting fairness, what does this mean for our learning and growth as
students and future employees?

"You Don't Have To…"

by Carrie Gilmer

Reprinted from the March 2007 issue of Expectations, the newsletter of
the Minnesota Parents of Blind Children, a division of the NFB of
Minnesota.

Editor's Note: Carrie Gilmer is emerging as an energetic and
philosophically thoughtful parent leader in the National Organization
of Parents of Blind Children.
In this editorial, originally titled "The Power of Expectations,"
Carrie examines the importance of expectations even in the ordinary
events of life that,
at the time they occur, may seem inconsequential. Here is Carrie:

Carrie understands that raising expectations is a fundamental
necessity in the development and independence of her son Jordan.
Four little words, "You don't have to…" How much harm can be done by
such a seemingly innocent pardon? After all it is born out of the
kindest and most
sympathetic of intentions, right? This thing is unfair for you to do,
so you don't have to do whatever this is. That levels everything; all
is right with
the world.

Recently my son Jordan was excused from an assignment at school with
the words, "You don't have to do it." His class was to view a film and
answer some
questions about it from a worksheet as they were viewing the video. It
was a spontaneous assignment added to the planned showing of the video
because the
class had been fidgety and the teacher wanted to ensure that the
students focused on the film. Therefore, the worksheet was not
available in Braille.

Jordan has enough vision so that when educational videos are played,
he is given the option of simultaneously viewing the video on a
separate monitor.
This way, he can essentially put his face right up to the screen and
view what he can--which even then is not much. He can also access
regular print (such
as that on this worksheet) with magnification, but it is very slow going.

Thinking that it would be too hard for Jordan to try to see the print,
write, and keep his face on the screen to view the video visually all
at the same
time--while also rationalizing that Jordan, (who has a reputation for
being very focused) is not a fidgety student--the teacher decided to
give Jordan
a break.

Her offer: "Everyone is doing this worksheet Jordan, but I know you
pay attention and I know it would be harder for you, so you don't have
to do it if you
don't want to."

Jordan, for his part, readily agreed to the logic and gladly accepted
the offer that he "didn't have to do" this.

At first, I thought he had been excused simply because the Braille was
not available. When the teacher explained what occurred (we happened
to have a conference
within days of discovering that the incident had happened) my husband
and I indicated to her that we understood and accepted her explanation
that for Jordan
to do the assignment from the print copy might have actually caused
him to be less focused on the film. The whole matter was taking up too
much of the
conference time and so, after discovering the accurate sequence of
events from the teacher's side of things, we moved on. It wasn't until
after we left
the conference that I allowed myself to think more deeply about it.

I began to ask myself some questions. Wouldn't the other students have
had to take their eyes off the film as well in order to read and write
on the worksheet?
Might this have caused the sighted students to also miss something as
they concentrated on filling out the worksheet during the film?
Granted, they probably
would be able to do it faster than Jordan, but still…

I began to consider what Jordan or the teacher might have thought to
do if the idea that "he didn't have to" was totally unthinkable or
unacceptable--not
even in the realm of possibility. What if, at the start, as the
worksheets were being passed, another student had read the questions
to Jordan while he
typed them into his BrailleNote? It would have taken less than five
minutes to do this. Then Jordan could have "kissed" the screen without
interfering
with his hands reading and writing the refreshable Braille on his
BrailleNote. He would then, in fact, have the best opportunity in the
entire class to
focus on every moment of the film while writing.

What if he had taken the sheet home and simply answered them that
evening, while the film was still fresh in his mind? The whole thing
was bothering me,
and I was pressing Jordan about it because I thought he should be even
more bothered by it. After all, he was the one who had been robbed.
Robbed, did
I say? Yes, robbed!

While the teacher's purpose for the assignment had merely been a tool
to motivate the class to pay better attention to the film, the actual
assignment
presented quite a learning opportunity. Doing it forced the students
to not only focus on the film, but to analyze it and then go further
to articulate
what they had analyzed as they formulated and wrote the answers. There
are a number of rather valuable skills involved. Everyone had a chance
to work on
those skills, whether they realized it or not, simply by doing the
assignment, but not Jordan. He simply passively watched and enjoyed
the film. He had
no catalyst to prompt him to analyze anything more deeply, and no
opportunity to practice articulating his thoughts. He was relieved by
a false idea of
fairness, but in reality robbed of a learning opportunity.

Beyond that, how did his classmates view Jordan from the perspective
of "he doesn't have to?" This question got to Jordan and he began to
appreciate that
it was a big deal after all. How can peers view you as an equal if you
"don't have to?" What does it mean when everyone accepts that you
"don't have to"
because whatever it is that you don't have to do is (or appears to be)
harder for you?

How often have I met blind children who didn't have to use their
canes, tie their shoes, learn to read Braille, be on time, or in
general to be expected
to do the same things at the same time as other children of the same
age and/or ability? I am sad to say I meet them too often. And what is
the consequence?
They didn't have to…so they don't!

Do you want to raise a blind child who can compete with his or her
peers? Then strike the words "you don't have to" from your vocabulary.