JRS Educational Therapy
Responsive vs. Directive Communication
Wednesday, April 17, 2024 by Julie Stoner | Educational Therapy
Responsive vs. Directive Communication by Play.Learn.Chat
Directive Communication 🧑 ➡️ 👧
A more 'traditional' approach: Often involves instructing children on how to behave, act and respond. Adults are in charge, adults have all the power.
Problems with Directive Communication:
Diminishes experiences: Makes children feel their experiences, feelings and perspectives are unimportant or invalid. Reduces self-concept and self-confidence. This can lead to poor mental health outcomes.
Invalidates feelings: Sends a message that their experience of the world and their own body and mind are not to be trusted, so they loose trust in the messages they perceive. Removes the ability to self-advocate if they can't even figure out what support they should ask for or need.
Responsive Communication🧑 🔄 👧
Empathetic, respectful approach: Focuses on listening (seeing, perceiving... not just with your ears!), viewing the child’s perspective as true for them and valid. Interactions start and continue by following what the child is thinking, telling us, and communicating in any way (behaviors included).
Benefits of Responsive Communication:
Validates experiences: Recognizes the legitimacy of a child’s feelings and perspectives, even if they fluctuate and even if they seem very different to what you would have expected.
Enhances understanding: Encourages a deeper empathy towards what the child is actually experiencing.
Supports self-advocacy: Helps children develop the ability to advocate for themselves by reinforcing their confidence in their own experiences.
Educational Therapy 101: Article from Undivided
Tuesday, January 30, 2024 by Julie Stoner | Educational Therapy
This is perhaps the best article I have found to describe the complexity of Ed. Therapy.
Gifted and Talented does not equal high-achieving
Thursday, January 11, 2024 by Julie Stoner | Educational Therapy
Gifted and Talented does not equal high-achieving
The world of gifted/talented and/or twice-exceptional (2e) is nuanced. These learners, often misunderstood, misdiagnosed and miss diagnosed, challenge conventional notions, especially the prevalent misconception that being gifted equates solely to high achievement and mathematical or linguistic intelligence.
Let's begin by dismantling these misconceptions. Giftedness is a multifaceted trait that goes beyond mere academic success. While some gifted students indeed excel academically, others may display their exceptional abilities in the realms of creativity, leadership, or specific talents such as art or music. By pigeonholing giftedness as synonymous with high achievement, we risk overlooking the diverse ways these students express their intelligence. 
Twice-exceptional students, a subgroup within the gifted community, further complicate the narrative. These students not only possess extraordinary abilities but also face learning challenges or disabilities. It’s important to recognize and address the intersectionality of their strengths and struggles. Advocating for educational equity means acknowledging of the unique needs of 2e students, a commitment to providing complete and thorough evaluations, and tailored support that nurtures their gifts and mitigates their challenges.
Fun Fact: Studies show more than 59% of students with ADHD have a comorbidity of Dysgraphia (or a specific learning disability of written expression). The connection between ADHD and writing is so common that some researchers have suggested that doctors include a dysgraphia (or SLD of written expression) screening as part of testing for ADHD.
To challenge existing norms, we must redefine our measures of success. Shifting the focus from a narrow view of achievement to a holistic understanding of giftedness allows for a more inclusive approach. Schools should embrace varied forms of intelligence, valuing creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills alongside traditional academic prowess.
The urgency of this shift becomes apparent when considering the consequences of the high-achievement misconception. Gifted students who don't conform to this expectation may be overlooked, their potential stifled by an education system that fails to recognize and nurture their unique strengths. This oversight perpetuates inequalities and hampers the development of a diverse pool of future leaders and innovators. 
In conclusion, the complexities of gifted and twice-exceptional students requires a critical examination of two common misconceptions 1) giftedness equals high achievement 2) giftedness only applies to mathematical and/or linguistic intelligence. Educational equity demands a more expansive view of intelligence, including policy changes and professional development for schools, staff, and teachers.
