>> Well, it can, given enough time, thought, preparation, and resources. Too often there are not enough of any of the above. <<
If you care about the people equally, then you divide whatever resources you have by the number of groups (if similar) or proportional to the size (if greatly different) and built suitable facilities for each.
I have found caring a more common limitation.
>> And even people with genuinely good intentions can be shockingly obtuse about it. And it can be genuinely difficult to see solutions when hampered by years of attachment to rules that are overly strict. I have had so many facepalm moments at myself and others over the years. <<
These are often straightforward to solve by involving each group in the providence of its own goods and services. They'll know what they need.
>> And people find the idea of separating/"othering" people so upsetting (understandably, with what goes on in special ed classrooms and the history of this kind of thing) that it's hard to get anyone to act sensibly.<<
True. But the other face of "Othering is bad" is "Have you tried not being gay?" 0_o People are different, and refusing to meet their needs because you dislike differences is harmful.
>> This is key. One of my big things that I repeat over and over every year is that there is no diagnosis required to access quiet space. There is no gatekeeping Nonsense.<<
That's good.
>> If a kid is being too loud or making a problem, that's an issue to work out with that kid, not something to build a blanket rule to prevent. <<
Common reasons for that are that they're too stifled. Kids are noisy and wiggly. They need lots of time outdoors to run and scream. They don't get it anymore. So then adult punish or drug the children for trying to meet their biological needs.
>> Of course, we do start running into the issue of having enough people in the quiet space that it's starting to get loud, but it's better than sticking everyone together and trying to shush the screamy ones or just let the ones with sensory stuff going on suffer. <<
How big is the space? What resources are available? If some children are wiggly but not screaming, then possibly a quiet corner and a fidget corner would help separate them. Sound-muffling things like foam mats or blackout curtains can muffle modest amounts of noise. But if they need to run and scream, a quick trip outdoors would be better for that.
>> Of course, when I'm not personally supervising things, this can become a problem because not everyone agrees. We've got a long way to go, particularly in terms of having an actual program rather than just a space. <<
That's a challenge.
>> The drop-in nature of it complicates that immensely. It's hard to build a group bond when it changes constantly. <<
You can't bond in that situation, because bonding takes time. All you can do is set parameters for the place.
>> But I refuse to start gatekeeping or telling kids they can only have one level of capacity at all times. <<
If anyone ever asks if you saved the world, you say yes. You'll probably never know how, but you're doing the work.
>>Yeah. Real access means options, not an impossible quest to make everyone the same.<<
I really admire the "flex" office designs that include a range of private offices, quiet individual work booths, private meeting rooms, semi-open meeting niches, open offices, and open interaction space. That accommodates a full range of personality types, individual needs, and project needs so people can freely choose what environment suits their current needs.
It also helps to have a list of accommodations that people can choose from, because so often when you ask what would help, they wail, "I don't knowwww!" This resource site offers accommodations by disability, by limitation, by work-related function, by topic, and by accommodation.
>> On a societal level, agreed. But it can be a resource and thought process problem (like, when people are having a failure of imagination rather than a failure of moral desire, if that makes sense. A "but we can't" that doesn't reach for better) on an organizational level. It's very frustrating. <<
As mentioned above, try using lists of options. If none of them seem to fit and nobody can find a way to get more, the problem may be unsolvable at that time due to short resources, whether personal or material. Are there ways to get more resources (e.g. ordering new materials, taking a class in facilitation skills) or not? If so, you may find new solutions. If not, it is probably not the fault of the people trying to solve the problem.
>> Especially when instead of lifting each other up we start tearing each other down because we can't figure out how to make what we have be enough to go around. <<
Yeah, bonobos seem to be the only species that does that fluently, but for Homo sapiens, sex makes people more envious, not less. 0_o
>> It's really hard for me to conceptualize "maybe they aren't doing better because they legit aren't capable of understanding why and how to do better" as real. <<
Watch for frustration and people saying things like "But I am trying" or "Easy for you."
>> It's also hard to figure out which difference is causing a communication issue. Neurodivergence? Intelligence? Perspective born of my history? General hardworkingness? <<
That kind of diagnostic work requires that you understand the parameters for each possible reason, then figure out what would distinguish them, then test or watch for situations that reveals those differences.
Neurodivergence is a two-way difference. Not only does the person have difficulty understanding neurotypical statements, they also describe things in ways that don't make sense to a neurotypical person. They just think differently. The pattern tends to be consistent, and they may be quite fluent both in speaking and listening to neurodivergent friends.
Intelligence is the most responsive to small learning aids. High linguistic intelligence will learn words just by reading or hearing them. Lower linguistic intelligence may show a notable boost in performance with the use of a dictionary, vocabulary cards, etc. 3-part cards are especially helpful.
Perspective born of lived experience can be hard to spot. You mostly have to listen for people telling stories about their past that illustrated why they do or don't do certain things. If they're not sharing, try prompting for that. "You say X doesn't work for you. Can you tell me about a time you tried it in the past, and what happened? That might help us figure out what to do."
Perspective born of ethnicity, nationality, etc. will act a lot like neurodivergence: a two-way difference that disappears in like group. Also look out for prejudicial or discriminatory speech or behavior from people to highlight why they might not interact well with such a person.
Work ethic varies across groups. Mainstream Americans think Native Americans are lazy because they only work when they need something. Native Americans think mainstream Americans are workaholics because they work whether or not they need something. Check the work ethic of the person's group and your own if different. Then there's personal motivation. Some people are always hard workers (or high-energy) and some are always lazy (or low-energy) but many vary depending whether the work is interesting or valuable to them. Gifted people in particular often have a low tolerance for boredom, are constantly asked to do work far below their level, and drag through it; or they finish the stupid assignment before the teacher finishes passing it out and then are bored for the 30 minutes it takes everyone else to flounder through it; but they can work quite intensely for long times at things they are passionate about and don't even feel like that is work.
>> And would it even help if I did know? <<
Not always, especially with a resource shortage; but in general, many problems are solvable with information that are not solvable without it.
Re: Intelligence is confusing
If you care about the people equally, then you divide whatever resources you have by the number of groups (if similar) or proportional to the size (if greatly different) and built suitable facilities for each.
I have found caring a more common limitation.
>> And even people with genuinely good intentions can be shockingly obtuse about it. And it can be genuinely difficult to see solutions when hampered by years of attachment to rules that are overly strict. I have had so many facepalm moments at myself and others over the years. <<
These are often straightforward to solve by involving each group in the providence of its own goods and services. They'll know what they need.
>> And people find the idea of separating/"othering" people so upsetting (understandably, with what goes on in special ed classrooms and the history of this kind of thing) that it's hard to get anyone to act sensibly.<<
True. But the other face of "Othering is bad" is "Have you tried not being gay?" 0_o People are different, and refusing to meet their needs because you dislike differences is harmful.
>> This is key. One of my big things that I repeat over and over every year is that there is no diagnosis required to access quiet space. There is no gatekeeping Nonsense.<<
That's good.
>> If a kid is being too loud or making a problem, that's an issue to work out with that kid, not something to build a blanket rule to prevent. <<
Common reasons for that are that they're too stifled. Kids are noisy and wiggly. They need lots of time outdoors to run and scream. They don't get it anymore. So then adult punish or drug the children for trying to meet their biological needs.
This bullshit:
https://www.freerangekids.com/how-children-lost-the-right-to-roam-in-just-4-generations
Leads directly to this problem:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190504134857/http://www.balancedandbarefoot.com/blog/the-real-reason-why-children-fidget
>> Of course, we do start running into the issue of having enough people in the quiet space that it's starting to get loud, but it's better than sticking everyone together and trying to shush the screamy ones or just let the ones with sensory stuff going on suffer. <<
How big is the space? What resources are available? If some children are wiggly but not screaming, then possibly a quiet corner and a fidget corner would help separate them. Sound-muffling things like foam mats or blackout curtains can muffle modest amounts of noise. But if they need to run and scream, a quick trip outdoors would be better for that.
>> Of course, when I'm not personally supervising things, this can become a problem because not everyone agrees. We've got a long way to go, particularly in terms of having an actual program rather than just a space. <<
That's a challenge.
>> The drop-in nature of it complicates that immensely. It's hard to build a group bond when it changes constantly. <<
You can't bond in that situation, because bonding takes time. All you can do is set parameters for the place.
>> But I refuse to start gatekeeping or telling kids they can only have one level of capacity at all times. <<
If anyone ever asks if you saved the world, you say yes. You'll probably never know how, but you're doing the work.
>>Yeah. Real access means options, not an impossible quest to make everyone the same.<<
I really admire the "flex" office designs that include a range of private offices, quiet individual work booths, private meeting rooms, semi-open meeting niches, open offices, and open interaction space. That accommodates a full range of personality types, individual needs, and project needs so people can freely choose what environment suits their current needs.
It also helps to have a list of accommodations that people can choose from, because so often when you ask what would help, they wail, "I don't knowwww!" This resource site offers accommodations by disability, by limitation, by work-related function, by topic, and by accommodation.
For children:
https://www.understood.org/articles/en/common-classroom-accommodations-and-modifications
https://www.parentcenterhub.org/accommodations
https://www.shaker.org/Downloads/Accommodations_and_Modifications_Guide.pdf
>> On a societal level, agreed. But it can be a resource and thought process problem (like, when people are having a failure of imagination rather than a failure of moral desire, if that makes sense. A "but we can't" that doesn't reach for better) on an organizational level. It's very frustrating. <<
As mentioned above, try using lists of options. If none of them seem to fit and nobody can find a way to get more, the problem may be unsolvable at that time due to short resources, whether personal or material. Are there ways to get more resources (e.g. ordering new materials, taking a class in facilitation skills) or not? If so, you may find new solutions. If not, it is probably not the fault of the people trying to solve the problem.
>> Especially when instead of lifting each other up we start tearing each other down because we can't figure out how to make what we have be enough to go around. <<
Yeah, bonobos seem to be the only species that does that fluently, but for Homo sapiens, sex makes people more envious, not less. 0_o
>> It's really hard for me to conceptualize "maybe they aren't doing better because they legit aren't capable of understanding why and how to do better" as real. <<
Watch for frustration and people saying things like "But I am trying" or "Easy for you."
>> It's also hard to figure out which difference is causing a communication issue. Neurodivergence? Intelligence? Perspective born of my history? General hardworkingness? <<
That kind of diagnostic work requires that you understand the parameters for each possible reason, then figure out what would distinguish them, then test or watch for situations that reveals those differences.
Neurodivergence is a two-way difference. Not only does the person have difficulty understanding neurotypical statements, they also describe things in ways that don't make sense to a neurotypical person. They just think differently. The pattern tends to be consistent, and they may be quite fluent both in speaking and listening to neurodivergent friends.
Intelligence is the most responsive to small learning aids. High linguistic intelligence will learn words just by reading or hearing them. Lower linguistic intelligence may show a notable boost in performance with the use of a dictionary, vocabulary cards, etc. 3-part cards are especially helpful.
Perspective born of lived experience can be hard to spot. You mostly have to listen for people telling stories about their past that illustrated why they do or don't do certain things. If they're not sharing, try prompting for that. "You say X doesn't work for you. Can you tell me about a time you tried it in the past, and what happened? That might help us figure out what to do."
Perspective born of ethnicity, nationality, etc. will act a lot like neurodivergence: a two-way difference that disappears in like group. Also look out for prejudicial or discriminatory speech or behavior from people to highlight why they might not interact well with such a person.
Work ethic varies across groups. Mainstream Americans think Native Americans are lazy because they only work when they need something. Native Americans think mainstream Americans are workaholics because they work whether or not they need something. Check the work ethic of the person's group and your own if different. Then there's personal motivation. Some people are always hard workers (or high-energy) and some are always lazy (or low-energy) but many vary depending whether the work is interesting or valuable to them. Gifted people in particular often have a low tolerance for boredom, are constantly asked to do work far below their level, and drag through it; or they finish the stupid assignment before the teacher finishes passing it out and then are bored for the 30 minutes it takes everyone else to flounder through it; but they can work quite intensely for long times at things they are passionate about and don't even feel like that is work.
>> And would it even help if I did know? <<
Not always, especially with a resource shortage; but in general, many problems are solvable with information that are not solvable without it.