About Locus of Control

Locus of control refers to how a person perceives the cause of life events. Someone with an internal locus of control would generally perceive herself as responsible for certain occurrences (his actions would have a direct bearing on the result), while a person with an external locus of control would most often blame (or thank) fate, destiny, luck, society or some other force beyond her control.

Different people credit different forces for such life events as personal successes and failures. For example, if a struggling actor does audition after audition only to be rejected time and time again, he might blame his own lack of ability ("I'm a terrible actor" or "Nobody likes my acting"). In this case, his locus of control for his failures would be internal. But if one day, this same actor were actually offered an acting job, he might place this success on circumstances beyond his control. He might not believe that his own performance, talent, hard work, or exceptional efforts got him the job, but would rather make rationalizations against his own effort ("I was probably the only audition" or "Gosh, that was a stroke of luck"). When it comes to success, he believes that he has no say in what happens-he is merely a helpless participant in a fate determined by random circumstances. Evidently, one can have a different locus of control for personal successes than for personal failures.

There is a certain tried and true recipe for coping with the challenges and stresses of life. In fact, research has shown that in academics, athletics, and other competitive fields, a particular locus of control is most likely to encourage success. In terms of success, it is best to attribute it to stable internal forces. For example, a public speaker who concludes his first speech to uproarious applause would do best to thank his own orating abilities, writing skills, and sense of humor. He would also benefit by believing that he could do it again if he had to.

When it comes to failures, however, it is wisest to adopt another strategy. Those who are best off feel that they fell on their face (figuratively speaking) due to unstable and even external forces. For example, it is healthiest for an athlete to blame a slight headache or tension (both are unstable internal forces), poor weather conditions, or bad shoes (both are unstable external forces) for coming up short of the mark. By doing so, the athlete is maintaining a fundamental confidence in her own abilities, since presumably the headache will go away, she can relax, or wear different shoes, and the conditions will be better next time. With a basic faith in her capability, she will feel motivated to try again. In short, it is important to internalize success, but NOT failure.

However, there are limitations. While it is best to thank your own talent and abilities for success and to blame failure on something out of your control, it is also important to remain firmly grounded. It is of no benefit to miss out on learning from your mistakes because you consistently blame society for your failures. Nor is it useful to be totally blind to your own limitations (we all have them) or lack of effort. There are obvious advantages to realizing where YOU might have come up short in an instance of failure. Then you can go about fixing the problem in order to heighten the probability of success the next time. To find this balance, one needs a healthy sense of self and a reasonable grasp on reality.

Working with ESL Parents

Damien Rap

Damien's Rap for Theater Arts ~ I find it amazing that a child with autism that never wanted to participate in anything has come this far. I know it is difficult to hear him, but as a mom of a child with autism, I am more proud of the fact that he is up in front of the class doing this than anything else. I'll get the words from him and add them later. According to his teacher and his classmates, he was the best in the group. Move on over Eminem.

Bully Teacher

I am so angry with the school because a teacher has been exiling Damien from the classroom WITHOUT a pass due to another student saying, “He makes me uncomfortable.” His IEP specifically states that if he gets stressed, the teachers are supposed to either make concessions for him as providing him a place to pace or if the students complain, send him to content mastery, so he can pace there.

Instead, she sends him out of the classroom without a pass leaving him vulnerable to getting detention for being out of the classroom without a pass. She violated the IEP, therefore, she broke the law. I feel this would have been the perfect opportunity to have Damien teach the students in the class about autism.

Instead, she backed up the thoughts that there is something wrong with children with autism, and they are something to be scared of. I feel that the repercussions of the media’s Sandy Hook lashout toward people with autism has finally reared its ugly head. I was expecting to see it soon, but I did not think it would be from a bully teacher.

Damien begged me not to call the school and refused to tell me which teacher it was. I respected his wishes and did not call for a couple of days, but the more I thought about it, the more I decided that they are just bullying Damien for being himself, no other reason. I never believed a teacher would back up a bully.

We have worked far too hard to have Damien accepted by his peers. He has taken himself from being considered low functioning to now being considered high functioning. He has advocated for himself time and time again, but because he likes this teacher, he is afraid to say anything. Now, this teacher has undone 15 1/2 years of work. I will not stand for it.

That other student will continue to marginalize, bully, and be frightened of children with autism. I will not stand for that.  It is a disservice to both Damien and this other child to treat Damien as something to be afraid of.

I called the special education counselor, and she assured me that this will be remedied as soon as possible. It better be.

Working with Families of Children with Low Incident Disabilities

Brodkin, Adele M. (2006). “That’s Not Fair!” Helping the Child with a Sibling Who Has Special Needs. Early Childhood Today, 20, 18-19.

Adel Brodkin has a Ph.D. in psychology. She is also a consultant and author of several books that deal with problematic behavior as well as a producer and writer of educational videos. In this article, Brodkin is approached with a difficult situation dealing with a sibling of a child with disabilities. The sibling is a preschool student who had been doing well in preschool until her younger brother with a disability joined the school. Before her brother’s attending of the preschool, Audrey had been a well-behaved, happy little girl. Brodkin suggests that the teacher quietly praise the young girl and plan activities that Audrey does well with. Brodkin suggests to the parents they have someone go along with them on outings and to the school so Audrey can have more time with her parents as well as counseling with a therapist that has experience dealing with families of children with disabilities. Though Brodkin’s suggestion seem to be valid, asking both parents to be around most of the time. Often with families affected by disabilities, one parent does all of the appointments, therapies, and work with the children while the other provides for the family.

Eberly, Jody L. (2007). Communication with Families Across Cultures: An Investigation of Teacher Perceptions and Practices. School Community Journal, 17, 7-26.

The authors of the article are professors in the department of early childhood education at the College of New Jersey. The authors state the purpose of the study is to help teachers learn how to work and effectively communicate with families of students from cultures different than their own. Their methodology was to develop protocol for two different focus groups. The sessions with the focus groups were tape recorded as they were interviewed. There were four themes the interview questions related to: “ways in which family values and beliefs impact learning, ways of communicating with and involving parents from diverse cultures, specific questions participants would like to ask parents about their cultural practices, and specific needs for professional development in working with parents from diverse questions.” The study found that defining culture is difficult, many participants understand the importance of understanding culture but still look at some beliefs as negative, had difficulty dealing with race and class differences, in diverse groups people are forced to confront cultural biases, and professional development programs would be beneficial to help teachers confront their cultural biases. The importance of understanding cultural diversity is also supported by Lam’s finding in her study. The reliability of this study should be called into question because of the small focus groups and the centralized area in which the study was done.

Lam, Sarah Kit-Yee. (2005). An Interdisciplinary Course to Prepare School Professionals to Collaborate with Families of Exceptional Children. Multicultural Education, 13, 38-42.

Sarah Kit-Yee Lam is an Assistant Professor of the Department of Counseling and Special Education and Rehabilitation at California State University in Fresno, California. Lam centered her study on determining what kind of methods could be used to teach professionals to work with families of students with exceptional children. Lam shows that effectively working with families is key to help students with disabilities succeed. Furthermore, she explains that being to work with families who are culturally diverse also affects the outcome of students with disabilities’ educations. Lam found that a course for future professionals could help them communicate families of children with disabilities including those with cultural differences, which supports Eberly, Joshi, and Konzal’s claim that professional development programs would be beneficial to help teachers confront their cultural biases. The limitations of the study include small sample, the centralization of the study in an area that may not be representative of other areas, and the method of collecting data may be skewed because of subjectivity.

Llewellyn, G., McConnell, D., Schneider, J., and Wedgewood, N. (2006). Families Challenged by and Accommodating to the Adolescent Years. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50, 926-936.

The authors of this article are faculty members at the Australian Families and Disability Studies Research Centre. This is an ecocultural study that centers on the difficulties faced by families of children with disabilities and strategies used to support the family routine to help the child with their development. The methodology of the families included interviews with families of adolescents with disabilities. The authors had the families deviate from their regular routines and studied the effect of the changes they made. The study found that the family routine stimulates the growth of adolescents with disabilities. The study also suggest awareness of cultural differences of the family can help professionals better support the families. The need for professional understanding of culture to helping the growth of the student with disabilities is supported by the articles by Lam, and Eberly, Joshi, and Konzal’s findings. Only 20 families were studied. Limitations to the study include the small sample size, the centralized area of the study, and subjectivity of the respondents.

Lord Nelson, L.G., Summers, Jean A., and Turnbull, A.P. (2004). Boundaries in Family-Professional Relationships. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 153-165.

The authors of this study are Professors of Education. The purpose of the study was to explore the development of the parent/professional relationship and the need for boundaries in these relationships. The methodology was to produce 34 focus groups of 107 participants in three states, Kansas, North Carolina, and Louisiana. The focus groups were diverse in their demographic characteristics. However the demographics do not prove to be representative of the population at large. The limitations of the study include subjectivity, lack of participation in all phases, no back translation, the lack of extensive data for sufficient analysis, and the study took more time than expected. The study suggests that professionals be accessible to parents so that there is an open line of communication about preferences based on their involvement with the students and the boundaries to the parent/professional relationship. By explaining their involvement preferences early in the relationship, the professional is less likely to go beyond the call of duty or be spread too thin.

Community Based Instruction

Alberto, Paul A.; Cihak, David; and Frederick, Laura D. (2007). Use of Brief Functional Analysis and Intervention Evaluation in Public Settings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9, 80-93.

Cihak is an Assistant Professor at the University of Tennessee in the Department of Theory and Practice in Teacher Education. Alberto is a Research Professor in Mental Retardation and the Director, Bureau for students with Multiple and Severe Disabilities at Georgia State University. And Fredrick is an associate professor in the College of Education at Georgia State University, the director of the Office of Direct Instruction, and an author, who specializes in Behavior Analysis, Education, and Effective Schooling. Their purpose of the study was to identify and select intervention models to prevent inappropriate social behaviors of students with intellectual disabilities in a public community behavior. Their method was to have four high school students participate in functional analysis in order to help them maintain target behaviors. They found that teaching the students to self-monitor their behaviors by using auditory prompts was more effective than any other method they had tried. The major limitation to their study is the small sample size used. With so few students studied, one must be cautious when using the methods they have suggested.

Bang, Myong-Ye.; and Lamb, Peg. (1997). Impacts of an Inclusive School-to-Work Program. (Report No. EDO-408-752 EC-305-623). Utah. 2-14.

Lamb is the Director of NSF Bridges Transition Project and Myong-Ye Bang is a professor who works with the Holt Public Schools in Michigan. The purpose of their study was to “investigate the effects of this inclusive School-To-Work program [Holt High School’s Transition Coalition] on students” (5). The authors had noted that most school-to-work programs did not allow access for most students with intellectual disabilities because of their grades, social skills, and attendance. The researchers found that the students became self-advocates and were able to set goals for their own futures. They also better understood their own strengths and weaknesses. Overall the students were able to determine what factors were important for success in the work place, their social skills improved, and their performances were improved. The students with intellectual disabilities were able to advocate for supports necessary for future success. The employers also benefited because the program helped to change their views about hiring younger employees, particularly those with disabilities. The main problem with this study is that it only includes one high school in a rural area. The results may not be representative of the population, particularly those in an urbanized area.

Bowman, Garry. (2007). Employment Lifestyle Training: A New Approach to Vocational Rehabilitation Teacher Services. Rehabilitation Education for Blindness and Visual Impairment, 39, 141-148.

Garry Bowman is a Teacher Consultant at Texas Division for Blind Services. Bowman discusses the recent changes in the Texas Division for Blind Services program. He explains participants in the previous programs were not given the opportunity to increase their employment opportunities. Therefore, the new program combines both functional homemaking skills and employment lifestyle training. The individuals are trained rehabilitation teacher and given access to self-help guides. Bowman explains the program is important because people with visual impairments often have great difficulty generalizing homemaking skills to non-homemaking environments. Bowman asserts the group and community strategies of the program helps build social skills and confidence. He further explains that the individuals should develop self-direction and problem-solving strategies. Bowman explains the new program will train individuals on developing “job-related skills such as writing resumes, doing job searches, and interviewing” (147). A potential limitation to the program is that it has been developed for only one state. There may be more effective programs in other areas of the country. Also the complete removal of services is not good practice. A better program would be to re-evaluate participants annually and keep supports in place to address unforeseen problems.

Burcroff, Teri L.; Radogna, Daniel M.; and Wright, Erika H. (2003). Community Forays: Addressing Students; Functional Skills in Inclusive Settings. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 35, 52-57.

Teri L Burcroff is a Professor and Graduate Coordinator in the Department of Special Education & Rehabilitation at East Stroudsburg University. Daniel M. Radogna I am a Disability Services Specialist employed at Northampton Community College. The authors developed a 2 year program at one middle school designed to help students with disabilities develop their functional skills without having to spend too much time out of their inclusive classrooms. The researchers set up a set of guiding principles that resisted a return to self-contained classrooms. The researchers developed a definition for inclusion and worked in teams to develop goals and objectives based upon each students’ IEPs. The curriculum in the general education classrooms was modified based upon their need for functional skill development outside of these classrooms. In order to generalize sills learned in their inclusive settings, the small groups of students went on trips into the community in order to participate in community-based activities. Though the programs showed success in the areas of social skills and self-advocacy in the first year, the program appeared to have returned to a self-contained program. The authors argue that was not the case.

Kluth, Paula. (2000). Community-Referenced Learning and the Inclusive Classroom. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 19-26.

Dr. Paula Kluth is a former special education teacher who has served as a classroom teacher, consulting teacher, and inclusion facilitator. Dr. Kluth explains that community-referenced learning has been a part of education for quite some time, and specifies three types of education that can be implemented in the community, work experiences, research teams, and service learning. Therefore, Dr. Kluth suggests that teachers “reexamine traditional approaches to curriculum and instruction.” Kluth argues CBI helps students generalize classroom skills to the community and broadens their community awareness. Kluth suggests interactive education received outside of the classroom is more meaningful for students with and without disabilities, as well as ESL students, and gifted students. Kluth asserts the need for working as a team between administrators, general educators, and special educators in order to develop an effective CBI. Kluth further suggests that communicating the importance of CBI to the future welfare of students to their families is crucial for the success of such programs. Although Kluth feels that communities, teachers and all students benefit from CBI, she suggests future research and studies in order to enhance effectiveness, and develop solutions to problems such as funding and staffing.

Self-Determination and Students with Low Incident Disabilities

Campbell-Whatley, Gloria D. (2008). Teaching Students About Their Disabilities: Increasing Self-Determination Skills and Self-Concept. International Journal of Special Education, 23, 137-144.

Dr. Campbell-Whatley is a Professor at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Campbell-Whatley suggests that students who learn self-determination skills are more successful students than those who do not. Campbell-Whatley suggests that students should begin to learn awareness skills in elementary years, exploration in the middle school years, preparation in the high school years, and placement in the post school years. Campbell-Whatley’s method was to comprise a study by including 13 participants from the mid-west area, who range from elementary to high school. The special education teachers of the students gave the students The Piers Harris Self Concept Scale before and after the implementation of the guided study. The students were taught what it means to have a learning disability, about successful people with learning disabilities, characteristics of learning disabilities, about special education programs, to discover their strengths and weaknesses, how to deal with problems and to self-advocate, and behavior management. The study showed that the students were more aware after the program and their self-esteem was raised. Potential limitations to the study include small sample size, centralized location, and the study does not show whether or not students were able to generalize their newfound skills.

Chambers, Cynthia R.; Lee, Youngsun; Lida, Kerry M.; Saito, Yumiko; Singh, Vandana; and Wehmeyer, Michael L. (2007). Self-Determination: What Do We Know? Where Do We Go?. Exceptionality, 15, 3-15.

The authors suggest though there are numerous studies on self-determination, “there has not been a review of interventions and outcomes measuring global self-determination” (4). The authors gathered data-based, peer-reviewed studies that measure global self-determination. Of the 1000 articles reviewed, the authors included the results of only 31 of the articles. These articles were split up into three categories: nonintervention or descriptive studies, perceptions about self-determination, and efficacy of interventions to promote self-determination. The researchers found that people with disabilities who have high levels of self-determination are more successful than those with low levels of self-determination. Furthermore, those who reside in more restrictive environments have lower levels of self-determination. The research shows though teachers value self-determination, the value is often not translated into practice. The research further shows that there still needs to be more studies done on the impact of interventions on global self-determination. The authors suggest there is a need for teacher training and support, implementation of strategies in the classroom, family education and involvement, promoting self-determination in young students with disabilities.

Marks, Susan U. (2008). Self-Determination for Students with Intellectual Disabilities and Why I Want Educators to Know What It Means. Phi Delta Kappan, 90, 55-58.

Marks asserts self-determination and inclusion are related to “the principles of democratic education” (55). Marks defines self-determination as the ability to make things happen. Marks argues that students with disabilities often want to learn and want to be given the opportunity to make decisions for themselves. Marks further argues that most special education programs do not address self-determination. Therefore, students with disabilities are “an oppressed group” (56). Marks suggests that varied experiences must be introduced to students with intellectual disabilities in order to allow them to become self-determined. Marks asserts this can be done by giving students with disabilities an opportunity to work with a diverse group of people by taking them out of the segregated classrooms and allowing them access to extra-curricular activities. Marks reminds the audience that self-determination is “a lifelong learning process” that follows us into adulthood (58). Marks asserts that educators and parents often teach self-determination skills in a hierarchical pattern, which denies them “the opportunity to express greater self-determination” (58).

McCarthy, Deborah. (2008). Teaching Self-Advocacy to Students with Disabilities. About Campus, 12, 10-16.

McCarthy is a disability educator as well as a former student with a disability. McCarthy differentiates between disability educator and a service provider by suggesting that a disability educator is more of a companion to her students with disabilities. McCarthy also differentiates between the two by suggesting that the service provider only address the immediate needs of the students while a disability educator is more focused on addressing long-term needs. McCarthy argues that higher education requires students with disabilities to be their own advocates; how-ever, many of the students with disabilities going into college lack the skills to be their own advocate. This is supported by Marks article. McCarthy suggests as does Campbell-Whatley in her article that students should be taught self-advocacy beginning in the elementary years instead of only having day-to-day decisions addressed. McCarthy asserts that as disability educators, we need to acknowledge the uncertainty by helping students with disabilities know how to weigh options and take calculated risks. Disability educators should present students with disabilities with options to teach them self-advocacy, and educators should help their students frame new expectations. McCarthy further asserts that educators should “reinforce the notion that effective advocacy is a journey…[and] Interdependence and self-advocacy could coexist” (15).

Turnbull, Ann P. (2006). Self-Determination: Is a Rose by Any Other Name Still a Rose?. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 83-88.

Turnbull and Turnbull’s focus of their paper is to research literature on self-determination funding and look for consistencies and inconsistencies relating to the use of terminology and anticipated outcomes. Turnbull and Turnbull’s research found that students who have been taught self-determination skills in the academic setting have difficulty understanding the use of the term self-determination as it is related to funding into adulthood, and many of the stakeholders are confused by the use of the terms relating to self-determination funding. Turnbull and Turnbull show that terminology is often defined either in a values perspective of a functional perspective. However, Turnbull and Turnbull found that all of the articles agree that the outcome should be autonomy. Therefore, Turnbull and Turnbull suggest that terminology should be kept uniform in order to “enhance individual control,” and students with disabilities and their parents should be properly educated to gain a understanding of terms, which is correlated to an understanding of policy that directs self-determination and autonomy.