Why do DS's Teaching Assistants do his art work for him?

[donkeyderby]

DS comes home from his SLD school with artwork that he has obviously not contributed towards in any way, shape or form. Perhaps he chose a colour here or there, but that is quite obviously as far as it goes. As it is the artwork of an adult I am not related to, I swiftly put it in the bin.

Why is it seen as acceptable for grown adults to be paid to do silly sticking and colouring while the children they are working with sit doing nothing?

ds cant really use his hands and i've had some dubious bits of "artwork" home in the past but to be honest even if ds only picked a few of the colours etc i still act like it's his and say "oh did you do that?"
sad i know but he still gets all chuffed when we stick it up on the wall!

oh DD this made me lol
dd has done some amazing art work, oh and she made a proper bird box

not bad for someone with athetoid cp

Now I feel harsh and cynical! DS has always hated art - I tried to get him to paint and he ate the paint then pushed the whole affair on the floor. He shows no interest in the work he comes home with so I take that as my lead to shove it in the bin

However, I have seen some work that has been student-led, even those with very severe disabilities. It takes more imagination and skill to allow some students to get involved in their work and express themselves.

I can always tell what dd had done herself as she will have the colours on her to prove it
(meet up thread needs you)

Well done 2shoes DD! They just pretend they can't use their hands don't they? The moment your back is turned, they get out of their chairs and start with the saw and the wood.

DS painted a bird box once - I do believe he actually did it because it was quite....unusual!

think some TAs need a gentle reminder that a murky blob of spilt paint made by your child is far more valuable than their neat and tidy creations. thwarted artists?

Donkey Derby, this is the essence of so called special education.
Kind and well meaning but essentially clueless people really believe they are helping when in fact it is the very opposite.

It is the bane of my life as a SALT.

PECS refer to it as 'waitress service' which sums it up.

I tell staff that a picture can easily be created by
a. sticking paper on a wall not a table
b. coming back to it over the course of a few days/hours to add extra cloour after first application has dried.

There was a good quote in recent PECS training

'A functional skill is one that is done by someone else if the person with a disability can't (or isn't given the opportunity) to do it themselves.
Everytime I go to work I witness hundreds, nay thousnads of lost opportunities.

moondog that is a bit of a crap statement about sn education.

Care to elaborate?
I'm interested in your opinion.

it just sounded anti special school maybe I read it wrong.

yesssss donkeyderby

woo was just talking about this with my dh tonight.. we got our ds's folder from nursery with scribble and splodge which he's evidently done himself. Said how we wished we got more stuff like this from dd's school

I'm not 'anti' special schools 2shoes, from it.
The point is, they really should be special and most aren't because the powers that be fail to recognise that teaching kids with complex disabilities requires highly specialised training.

Dragging in someone who is nice and well meaning but knows bugger all about language and behaviour and evidence based practice and measuring outcomes just isn't good enough.

However this is the way it is (and will remain unless parents become more vocal in demanding thier children are effectively educated.)

'Nice' may have been considered good enough a few decades ago.
It isn't anymore, particulalry when we know how best to teach people the functional an d academic skills they need to live a meaningful life which is as independent as possible.

I'm not sure you need lots of staff with highly specialised training but you do need someone to regularly instruct the staff on how to allow the young person to make their own marks in art. A gentle reminder that it is ridiculous to be doing art work for the children.

I think there is good work done when outside organisations come into special schools to do art workshops, but the staff are in need of the workshops as much as the kids

I think though that in mainstream schooling, there is now a cultural assumption that education is about nurturing innate genius/talent rather than instilling and re inforcing dedication and hard work to achieve results. Where will this leave a child who presents with no talent that is obvious to a mainstream teacher who wants to help a genius unfold?

this ethos of children with sn doing things for themselves, with the minimum level of support given in order to facilitate a particular activity or function is what I find very attractive in Condeuctive Education

I presumed that other agencies and organisations with different methodologies and approaches would at least share this ethos. Have been quite disappointed to find otherwise

Like with art - who cares as parents what the overall quality of the work is like? Like dd and 2shoes have said, our expectations for a child with lots of limitations affecting this activity are not exactly high. I'd like to think that painting gave my dd chance to choose colours, to have the sensory experience of moving paint and mixing colours with her hand, to understand cause and effect. Am not adverse to her been guided how to use a brush or whatever, so obviously that would require some hand over hand support. I certainly don't care that something is recognisable or looks finished. Maybe it is nice for my dd to feel like she has made a santa head from a paper plate tho? Ah I dunno. Would imagine she would have lost interest once she wasn't allowed to chew the cotton wool

I'm pretty sure ds does most of his artwork as it is rubbish not very skilled. If he'd been helped with last year's Christmas present of 'coasters' they might lie flat on the table and we'd be able to put actual cups on them .

Donkey, it would be nice to think that allowing children to do things for themselves doesn't require specialised training but it does.
Of ocurse, teaching maths or science or language skills requires precise analysis of component parts, judicious use of language and carefull gathering of data to measure progress (or otherwise).
Arguably, helping kids have fun in art doesn't need this but it still requires a deep and clear understanding of the fact that despite the fact that it is quicker and easier (and that is the crux of the matter) to grab the child's hand and 'guide' them, unless they experience something for themselves, it is worthless.

No, not rocket science but most people don't or won't get it so my conclusion has to be that they require explicit training and a very clear understanding of their role, duties and purpose.

That's funny, Pixel.

Cyber, re this

'I think though that in mainstream schooling, there is now a cultural assumption that education is about nurturing innate genius/talent rather than instilling and re inforcing dedication and hard work to achieve results. Where will this leave a child who presents with no talent that is obvious to a mainstream teacher who wants to help a genius unfold?'

You are absolutely right.
All this nonsense about teaching being an art and 'nurturing and facilitating'. It is a smokescreen behind which ineffectually trained teachers hide. Able kids generally learn despite how they are taught, not because of it. Less able kids are generally stuffed.

None of this has anything to do with class sizes or staff;pupil ratios either. Another smokescreen.

If you are interested in this subject (ie educating kids with SN effectively), amy I recommend this [[http://www.amazon.co.uk/Myths-Misconceptions-About-Teaching-Classroom/dp/1578863465/ref=sr_1_1?ie= UTF8&qid=1260009480&sr=8-1-fkmr0 incredibly informative and readable book?

And again

Moondog, I agree that most people will have to be given training, or at the very least, a reminder that teachers and TA's are not being paid to stick and paint and it is a waste of LA.

Like you say though, it isn't rocket science so it should be something that a TA can learn without outsourcing all art activities to expensive outside arts companies. Expertise can be passed on hopefully.

I went to a talk by a music therapist (£50 per hour if you want some of that for your child) and some of the 'techniques' were common sense things that I realised I was already doing with my son. Dressed up as a 'therapy', it would seem to be something only a specialist with four years training could deliver, but with me and my son, it is just having fun.

LA money I mean

Our babysitter is a TA and she firmly believes it should be just the work of the child. She has removed extra bits the teacher has stuck on after the lesson!