By: Kari, MA, LPC candidate
Privilege makes life easier (Rosenblum & Travis, 1997). My work focusing on behavioral concerns in the school setting allowed me to see that general education (mainstream/standard school curriculum) students are privileged in comparison to their English Language Learner (ELL) and Special Education (SpEd) peers. They are privileged in the sense that they are less likely to be singled out by their general education teacher as having a behavior problem or suspected of being “on the spectrum”. They are privileged in that it is easier for them to learn the curriculum, both because it is taught in their native language and/or because they do not have any disabilities that would impact their learning, education, or development.
Those students also seem completely unaware of their privilege, which, according to Rosenblum and Travis (1997) is to be expected. They take for granted the fact that they understand English, the language in which all standard school curriculum (other than foreign language classes, of course) are taught in this country. Even in situations in which these students struggle through the difficult curriculum, they never seem to stop and think about how much more difficult it is for their classmates who are concurrently learning the English language on top of that challenging curriculum.
A further complication is that teachers seem to have evolved their own variation of profiling in which students labeled as ELL, learning disabled (LD), behavior disorder (BD), etc. are singled out for more acute observation, disciplinary action, alternative placement (i.e. special education or alternative school), or intervention, as they are assumed to be “trouble”.
Throughout my experiences in a number of different schools, both public and parochial, I observed students with cultural differences and/or language barriers (CD/LB) in their general education classrooms, noting not only their behavior but also how they are treated by the classroom teacher/teaching assistants and other students.
Common Teacher Concerns
The most common concerns with which teachers approached me included issues of defiance, aggression, motivation, social, and autism spectrum disorder. While some concerns of this nature are legitimate, I have seen many cases in which such concerns are due to cultural differences or a language barrier rather than a true behavioral disorder.
Defiance
Defiant is defined as “boldly resistant or challenging”. When a teacher would approach me with concerns about defiance, the issue was typically described in one of the following ways: (a) “[The student] does not follow directions” or (b) “[The student] needs a lot of prompting to complete tasks”. However, in situations where a language barrier is present, the child oftentimes simply does not understand the direction and, therefore, is not defiant; he or she simply cannot comprehend what is being asked of him or her until physically shown/guided. Once the student realizes what he or she is supposed to do, the direction is usually followed without resistance.
A true-life example from my work experience took place in a kindergarten classroom. I was supposed to be pulling a group of students for an intervention, but the teacher asked if I would help in the classroom first. The students had just finished measuring an object of their choice and had drawn a picture of that object at the top of their paper. They now had to copy a sentence that was written on the chalkboard: “The _____ was _____ cubes long.”
I was walking around the room checking the students’ work when I came across one little boy whose paper was blank other than his drawing. I complimented his picture and then told him it was time to copy the sentence, to which he replied: “No, I no copy.” Noting his heavily-accented English, I sat down next to him. I pointed to his illustration and asked what he had measured. He indicated that he had measured his Reading book. I pointed to the sentence on the chalkboard and prompted him by saying: “The book was… how many cubes?” It then appeared to dawn on him that he needed to write the sentence and fill in the blanks, and he immediately began to do so.
Looking back on that situation, I realize how easy it could have been (and was, in the case of his teacher) to misconstrue his lack of understanding as task refusal or disregarding directions. However, upon closer examination, the fact that he had just not understood at first became apparent. Once the time was taken to ensure that he understood, he was more than willing to do the work, and he took great care to complete it correctly (i.e. very careful letter formation, wanted it to look just so).
Aggression
Aggressive is defined as “characterized by or tending toward unprovoked offensives, attacks, invasions, or the like”. When a teacher would approach me with concerns about aggression, the issue was typically described in one of the following ways: (a) “[The student] does not use his/her words/uses inappropriate words to solve problems” or (b) “[The student] hits/pushes others”.
Although a child may occasionally behave aggressively, he or she may not be deserving of a label of “aggressive”, as there may be another explanation other than the child’s character. For instance, it is reasonable to assume that a CD/LB student could become extremely frustrated. The child may “lack alternative skills that would allow them to choose a socially-acceptable behavior to deal with a provocative situation in an assertive rather than aggressive manner” (Zirpoli, 2006, p. 4). Children who are still learning English may be frustrated by being unable to effectively communicate their feelings verbally, thus leading to aggressive behavior in a child who may otherwise have no aggressive tendencies.
Motivation
Lazy is defined as “averse or disinclined to work”. When a teacher would approach me with concerns about motivation, the issue was typically described in one of the following ways: (a) “[The student] does not complete assignments [on time]”; (b) “[The student] does not ask questions/asks inappropriate questions”; (c) “[The student] does not make an effort”; (d) “[The student] demonstrates poor class performance/grades”; or (e) “[The student] is often off-task”.
Depending on the child, the underlying issue may or may not be one of motivation:
We might have to reconsider any belief that students don’t do their best in class due to lack of
motivation… Language anxiety results in 1) failure or confusion and 2) avoidance… Students lose
concentration, tend to forget what they have learned, [and] repeat careless mistakes… They often
skip classes, come to class late and/or without preparation, postpone their homework, avoid
studying… [or] pretend to be indifferent. (Goshi, 2005, p. 64-65)
Although this particular article was centered on general education students in a foreign language class, the concept is applicable to ELL students learning English, as well.
Psychosocial
Anti-social is defined in the dictionary as “opposed or detrimental to social order or the principles on which society is constituted”. When a teacher would approach me with concerns about socialization, the issue was typically described in one of the following ways: (a) “[The student] avoids playing with others during recreation time”; (b) “[The student] does not engage with other children”; (c) [The student] has no concept of personal space”; (d) “[The student] does not share with/grabs things away from others”; or (e) “[The student] says inappropriate things”.
An alternative definition for anti-social is “unwilling or unable to associate in a normal or friendly way with other people”. A language barrier can make it very difficult for those children to express themselves and communicate with their peers. Conversely, cultural differences may lead to a certain degree of peer rejection. Either way, “lack of peer group acceptance contributes to loneliness, social dissatisfaction, and social withdrawal” (Perren, Von Wyl, Stadelmann, Bürgin, & Von Klitzing, 2006, p. 868). It may not be that the child is choosing not to interact but that he or she cannot do so effectively.
Another possibility is that the problem is developmental rather than pathological. Perhaps the child just does not know that something that they say or do is wrong, either because they have seen the inappropriate behavior performed by adults at home or because they have never seen the appropriate behavior modeled. For instance, there was a first-grade student who was sent to the principal’s office for threatening to cut off another boy’s genitals. In a tone that expressed confusion over why he was in trouble, the boy told the principal that he had not said what he said out of anger and that he had not meant it. The principal asked him where he had even heard that before, and the boy explained that his “daddy says it all the time”.
Children in general are very impressionable, but a CD/LB child, who is in great need of guidance on appropriate behavior and verbiage, will be even more so, so inappropriate modeling at home is especially detrimental. Thus, that is important information to have so that interventions can be planned accordingly.
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is defined as “the tendency to be absorbed in oneself; a condition in which one’s thoughts, feelings, and desires are governed by one’s internal apprehensions of the world” (Penguin Reference, 2001). ASD seems to be a favorite “go-to” diagnosis among teachers, at least in some of the schools where I have worked. Nearly every teacher who has approached me has, at some point, said: “This student must be on the spectrum.” Further, most of the students about whom that statement has been made are relatively new to this country.
When a teacher would approach me with concerns that a student is “on the spectrum”, the issue(s) was/were typically described in at least one of the following ways: (a) “[The student] avoids playing with others during recreation time”; (b) “[The student] does not engage with other children”; (c) “[The student] has flat affect”; or (d) “[The student] does not/rarely make(s) eye contact”.
There are several alternative explanations for this go-to diagnosis, some of which were mentioned in previous sections. Difficulty relating to other children can be attributed to cultural differences and language barrier. If a child has a hard time communicating, it will be difficult for him or her to bond with peers. Lack of affect may be due to, again, a lack of understanding, although it is also possible that cultural display rules are playing a role. For example, “Japanese norms lead people to… display fewer facial expressions in general than is true in the West” (Aronson, Wilson, & Akert, 2007, p. 97). Furthermore, eye contact and other body language can be attributed to differences in cultural norms: “…in other parts of the world, direct eye gaze is considered invasive or disrespectful” (Aronson et al., p. 97). Thus, it is clear that these seemingly tell-tale signs of ASD may not tell the whole story.
Why is This Happening?
There are several possibilities as to why this is occurring, some for which the teachers are responsible and some for which the students themselves are responsible. The first possibility is related to implicit personality theory, which is “a type of schema people use to group various kinds of personality traits together” (Aronson et al., 2007, p. 102). In a school, some teachers tend to assume that a student needing SpEd or ELL services will also have a behavior issue by default. As I mentioned previously, if such assumptions manifest in such a way that allows the student to realize them, a self-fulfilling prophesy situation may transpire.
Another possible explanation has to do with attribution theory, which applies to both teachers and students. I will discuss how this pertains to students in a moment, but some teachers tend to infer that the child is behaving in a certain way became of something internal (i.e. attitude, character, or personality) as opposed to something external (i.e. the situation of being a CD/LB student).
On the other hand, the reasoning for this may lie with something the student is doing, either deliberately or subconsciously, which is consistentwith self-awareness theory. Self-awareness theory is “the idea that when people focus their attention on themselves, they evaluate and compare their behavior to their internal standards and values” (Aronson et al., 2007, p. 133). A student may have done very well in school when he or she lived in another country, so he or she may not be used to struggling/failing in school (thus increasing frustration). “If you feel you can’t change your behavior, being in a state of self-awareness will be uncomfortable because you will be confronted with disagreeable feedback about yourself” (p. 133). This can lead to cognitive dissonance, which has a negative impact on self-esteem. In order to alleviate the discomfort, people tend to change their opinion of a behavior rather than the behavior itself (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). Therefore, a student may engage in self-handicapping in which he or she “create[s] obstacles and excuses for themselves so that if they do poorly on a task, they can avoid blaming themselves” (Aronson et al., p. 153). Thus, the student has made an external attribution for his or her poor performance.
In all fairness, though, general education teachers have a plethora of things that require their attention, including the rest of the students in their classroom (many of which, these days are overcrowded). According to the two-step process of attribution, a person may originally make an internal attribution about another person’s behavior but may later begin to consider alternative, external (situational) attributions for that behavior. Nevertheless, this process can be delayed due to lack of time, energy, and motivation (Aronson et al., 2007). Most teachers want their students to succeed and want to help them get the help that they need to do so. However, teachers are also extremely busy, overworked, and undervalued, which could explain the delay between the initial and follow-up attributions.
Conclusion: Implications for Mental Health Professionals
Respect for a person’s identity is… not just a courtesy we owe people. It is a vital human need. When we affirm people’s identities, we help them affirm themselves. When we respect their defining human qualities, we help them respect themselves. Conversely, a person or group of people can suffer real damage if the people or society around them mirror back to them a confining or demeaning or contemptible picture of themselves. Non-recognition or misrecognition can inflict harm, can be a form of oppression. (Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2005, p. 58)
This concept is important because it has serious implications for all of us in the mental health profession. We need to be aware of cultural differences and how they can be misconstrued as a psychological defect/disorder. Treating these differences as something that is “wrong” can do more harm than good for the client/student and may even cause them to doubt/shy away from the therapeutic process as a whole.
Further, mental health professionals who work with children need to be wary of the fact that teachers may not always be so culturally sensitive when it comes to referring children to therapy. The word of the teacher is important, but it can also be biased. I have seen many teachers hasten to (inappropriately) utilize the Conners' Rating Scale (a measure of ADHD) at the first sign of behavioral issues, the results of which are then sent on to the child’s student file, pediatrician, and/or therapist (if applicable). Such biased reports/results can impose a label on the child that need not be there, and mental health professionals need to be cognizant of that possibility.
Finally, the American Counseling Association (ACA) requires all counselors to possess multicultural/diversity competence, which the ACA (2005) defines as “a capacity whereby counselors possess cultural and diversity awareness and knowledge about self and others and how this awareness and knowledge is applied effectively in practice with clients and client groups” (section E.8). Similar sentiments can be found in the ethical guidelines of the American Psychological Association (APA) and the National Association of Social Workers (NASW). In essence, mental health professionals must be aware of and sensitive to diversity and practice accordingly.
References
