Learning Disability: Limiting Label or Helpful To The Student?

Doug Noon has a discussion at Borderlands, In Names We Trust,  on the advantages and disadvantages of labelling, specifically labelling kids as "learning disabled".  The comments are fascinating (I don't mean mine; I mean the other teachers').

I agree strongly with this statement:

How we talk about disability has a powerful influence oh how we think about it.

I am not sure I agree with this statement:

If we work from a deficit starting point, we constantly have to scale down, simplify, and accommodate.

I agree strongly with this statement

If, instead, we look at the situation as affording us an opportunity to restructure lessons with multiple entry points and an array of options for meeting objectives, we can begin to see how differentiating instruction would be beneficial to all students. The “disabled” student might also be viewed as a “creative” learner. Many students who are not LD also enjoy learning in a variety of ways.

I think it is very helpful for a student with learning disabilities to understand what his or her areas of deficit are, especially as the child matures.

Mel Levine has a different take:

Why do you say that the most important thing to know about a child is his or her strengths?

    If we want to prepare kids for adulthood, one of the most important things we can do is to celebrate their strengths, those assets with which they're going to find meaning in life and be able to make contributions. For the most part, adults who are leading worthy lives are doing so by mobilizing their strengths and affinities. What we should seek is a consonance between a student's education and his future career

 

You often use the word demystify when you talk about making students aware of their own strengths. Why is demystifying kids important?

    It's very hard for kids to work on something if they don't even know what it's called. Awareness is the flashlight that helps kids find their way to the switch that turns on an ability. I can't emphasize enough how much kids need to understand what their issues are. It's time to set aside labels—LD, for example—and be more specific. The labels are pessimistic. They don't take into consideration the most important thing about you: your strengths.

Maybe we are all saying the same thing.  A label is not a limit, but a tool for understanding  and moving on.

   

Comments

[Doug Noon]

Thanks, Liz. As it happens, we do work with our students to help them understand their challenges. As they mature, children are able to gain insight into their thought process, and it's important that we share our understanding with them. This is one of the things that I try to do with all of my students, not only those who've been identified with special needs. It sounds to me like we're in agreement about the labeling. It's a problem for us when we too-closely associate the word and the person. My thinking about a deficit starting point is that I find it much more helpful to think of students in terms of their capabilities rather than their limitations - which is exactly what you emphasized with the Levine quote about some labels being pessimistic. I also believe that being called "gifted" can be a burden.

The comment that you left intially which started me on this train of thought was very helpful. I'd like to explore this topic more in depth in terms of teacher preparation and the structure of public schooling as it impacts different kids. But this is a huge can of worms that I need to carefully unpack. There's a lot of hurt to work around, and it would be nice to find a way to build some bridges.