Why nothing for us!!!!

Oblomov said:

I've been told by people who did attend that private school that they were actually very good at nurturing oddballs and encouraging unusual interests.  So I guess it would either have made me or broken me... I'll never know.

??????

I once knew a former private school student who studied elementary aeronautics O Level in his own time and took the exam as a private candidate. The head teacher - a classicist - thought that he was wasting his time and he should concentrate more on Latin and Greek.

My experience of teachers is that they often look down on things that they don't know much about that aren't popular interests or school subjects.

In terms of my personal history, I have mixed feelings about the 11 plus, which I sat in 1972.  I was only one of two who passed in my school for that year - and the other boy went to a different grammar school.  This was really the start of my social isolation; I lost all the friends I'd made at primary school (they all attended the same secondary school together) and I didn't make any new ones at the grammar school until I was 16.

On the other hand, I did well academically at the grammar school and went to university.  I just never got a decent job anywhere and ended up in patchy, low-paid employment, self-employment and long bouts of unemployment until I was able to give up with work completely at the age of 46.

At eleven, I was also offered a place at a posh private school, but my parents allowed me to decline it.  Just attending the exam and interviews at the private school made me think I wouldn't be able to cope; in particular, I was horrified by the prospect of compulsory sports at weekends!  But the interviewing schoolmaster seemed to like me, despite the fact I tried to exit his study via a broom cupboard.  (Does anyone else share my hopeless sense of direction when leaving unfamiliar rooms!?)

I've been told by people who did attend that private school that they were actually very good at nurturing oddballs and encouraging unusual interests.  So I guess it would either have made me or broken me... I'll never know.

NAS15840 said:

It's not designed to pick all rounders, it's designed to pick out the most academic children, that's why they don't include other subjects. In effect the 11 Plus (or 12 plus) is somewhat of a badly written IQ test in that it does test IQ to a level, but it has some flaws in the methodology that means it's not a true IQ test.

Depending on which perspective you look at the 11 plus it's either an advantageous or a badly flawed test.

It's interesting to note that in secondary schools, that take the children who fail the 11 plus, there are many talented artists, musicians, linguists, historians, and sportsmen, whilst at the same time there are many students at grammar schools who are quite poor at these subjects. Grammar school students do tend on average to be better at mathematics and science than their secondary school counterparts. Time will tell whether there are significant differences with computer science.

It's not designed to pick all rounders, it's designed to pick out the most academic children, that's why they don't include other subjects. In effect the 11 Plus (or 12 plus) is somewhat of a badly written IQ test in that it does test IQ to a level, but it has some flaws in the methodology that means it's not a true IQ test.

I believe that the 11 plus exam is biased in favour of children with AS and some types of HFA. If it was a broader exam including music, PE, and foreign languages then I expect that it will be a very hard exam to pass unless you are a good all rounder.

There have been cases of children with ASD who have passed entrance exams for private schools with flying colours then struggled to survive because the school doesn't recognise, or want, any children with SEN.

Arran said:

But do they provide support for SEN? Many independent schools do not want students with SEN, especially ASD, or provide any help or support with it. Will grammar schools follow in their footsteps?

It depends on the school and what the SEN is, they will take the brightest children, if those children have a SEN and pass the entrance exams then yes they will take them and yes they will help provide and assist with that need. Mostly because of their entrance requirements they will tend not to have those at the more severe end of the scale. As quite often some of those with ASD will be the brightest in any particular year they do form part of the grammar schools intake and with the focus on academic achievement they will tend to do well, being geeky, intelligent and wanting to succeed isn't looked down on in grammar schools.

StephenHarris said:

What do you mean? She published her first article in 1981.

In an obscure academic journal that teachers and GPs don't read - or even know of its existence. Nobody appeared to follow up on the article either judging by the lack of references to it.

Lorna Wing did nothing to raise awareness of AS amongst the teaching community or wider society by writing articles for mainstream publications that ordinary people read.

AS only became public knowledge after Uta Frith translated Hans Asperger's article into English in the early 1990s. Effectively a parallel development to the work of Lorna Wing.

Just try finding somebody who was diagnosed with AS in the 1980s who HASN'T personally met Lorna Wing or her close circle of associates.

NAS15840 said:

There is a huge problem with that, it's why the changes taking place to the league tables will help though, getting a child from B to A, or C to B will be just as valuable as getting a child from D to C in terms of rankings.

Ending this C grade mediocrity that has blighted state schools for many years is a step in the right direction but it doesn't do anything to put an end to schools obsessing with academics at the expense of everything else. 

I think it's one of the major benefits of grammar schools, they are there for the more able children, those who can achieve to a higher level are given the chance to and activly encouraged to flourish.

But do they provide support for SEN? Many independent schools do not want students with SEN, especially ASD, or provide any help or support with it. Will grammar schools follow in their footsteps?

[quote user="NAS5690"]

I'm still intrigued why Lorna Wing kept AS almost secret during the 1980s.

[/quote

What do you mean? She published her first article in 1981.

Arran said:

My experience of school is that teachers only care about getting students up to C grade standards and they don't offer help and support for those who are of high academic ability.

There is a huge problem with that, it's why the changes taking place to the league tables will help though, getting a child from B to A, or C to B will be just as valuable as getting a child from D to C in terms of rankings. 

I think it's one of the major benefits of grammar schools, they are there for the more able children, those who can achieve to a higher level are given the chance to and activly encouraged to flourish.

NAS15840 said:

When there were kids in the year who were going to struggle to get three GCSEs of any kind I just wasn’t a priority. It’s fairly obvious now looking back, to any teacher with training and the time to pay attention that I was on the spectrum, those who had the time didn’t have the training and those with the training didn’t have the inclination to look, they were too busy dealing with the thick kids. Statistically speaking I was going to be fine (10 A*-C grades at GCSE, five of those A* or A, I didn’t matter, on paper I met the requirement for a good pupil, it didn’t matter I didn’t have any friends, I was doing fine on the stats for the league tables so I was left to my own devices.

Read my comment about there being too much emphasis on academic development.

http://community.autism.org.uk/discussions/health-wellbeing/education-matters/there-too-much-emphasis-academic-development

My experience of school is that teachers only care about getting students up to C grade standards and they don't offer help and support for those who are of high academic ability.

I think I went through a phase of being resentful, now I’m just disappointed, it wasn’t until a few years ago in my late twenties that I really figured it all out, started learning proper coping mechanisms, got formally (although privately) diagnosed. I think if it’s a shame I lost that decade because I could have understood it and learnt the coping mechanisms ten years earlier and not wasted that decade, but also I’ve turned it around now and I am who I am, time to make the best of the life I’ve got left to live!

I'm still intrigued why Lorna Wing kept AS almost secret during the 1980s.

It was totally missed for me at school, first I was regarded as a bit of a slow learner, then possibly dyslexic, then odd and sometimes shy, that was countered by things like I my verbal vocabulary being nearly five years ahead of my age by the time I left primary school even though my spelling and writing was a couple of years below, that I was fine if engaged in a subject I knew about, but didn’t really know how to “play”, I would just rerun the same play scenarios. I failed the eleven plus by one point, I actually think I’d have done better at grammar school being that I was a “bit of a swot and a geek”, I was let down by the language sections, same as Mensa IQ tests, I’ve passed and could join if I wanted, by reasoning skills put me in the top 1%, but some components of the original tests let me down.

The problem in secondary school was that they weren’t really interested in helping, I was bright enough that even whilst failing socially and struggling with some components I was still top of the class or in the top five in the year in maths, physics, chemistry, biology, geography, history, resistant materials, art (I wasn’t creative, but I was able to copy and adapt others ideas and technically I had enough skills), IT, I even managed to scrape the Bs in English language and literature because I could rote learn and critically analyse the text, even if I couldn’t analyse people’s motivation in the story and my spelling was far from great. When there were kids in the year who were going to struggle to get three GCSEs of any kind I just wasn’t a priority. It’s fairly obvious now looking back, to any teacher with training and the time to pay attention that I was on the spectrum, those who had the time didn’t have the training and those with the training didn’t have the inclination to look, they were too busy dealing with the thick kids. Statistically speaking I was going to be fine (10 A*-C grades at GCSE, five of those A* or A, I didn’t matter, on paper I met the requirement for a good pupil, it didn’t matter I didn’t have any friends, I was doing fine on the stats for the league tables so I was left to my own devices.

I think I went through a phase of being resentful, now I’m just disappointed, it wasn’t until a few years ago in my late twenties that I really figured it all out, started learning proper coping mechanisms, got formally (although privately) diagnosed. I think if it’s a shame I lost that decade because I could have understood it and learnt the coping mechanisms ten years earlier and not wasted that decade, but also I’ve turned it around now and I am who I am, time to make the best of the life I’ve got left to live!

StephenHarris said:

Yes, I was indeed one of them.

The same applied to me and that was in the late 1990s. I was referred to by a couple of nasty kids at primary school as autistic but the psychologists which assessed me ruled out autism because I did not fit the traditional criteria very well.

The problem with this is that by ruling out autism in a person then the NAS is cut out of the picture and it will not be an organisation that later assesses them. I have wondered how many people with AS and other high-functioning ASD over the years were never assessed by the NAS and psychologists who are experts in ASD simply because their educational psychologist or other psychologists who were assessing them ruled out autism early on. Does this help to explain the near silence on the AS front during the 1980s after Lorna Wing's paper was published in 1981?

community.autism.org.uk/.../aspergers-syndrome-clinical-account-lorna-wing

When my mother found out about AS and the strong potential that I have it, then it was very difficult for her to come to terms that it is an ASD because it manifests in a way that is nothing like traditional autism and autism had already been ruled out in me. At the time she considered AS to be a condition in its own right only vaguely related to autism.

Arran said:

Remember that many people diagnosed or suspected to have AS today who were children in the 1980s and early 1990s had (traditional) autism ruled out by psychologists even if they had a statement of SEN at school.

Yes, I was indeed one of them.

NAS15840 said:

I don’t accept that they have done a generally poor job of it or treat people as low priority. Apart from the services they provide there is also the need to raise awareness, the NAS do that, not always in the way everyone likes but then you can’t please everyone.

My mother was in the NAS when I was a teenager but eventually she left after realising that it provided very little for high-functioning people like myself and, due to its financial arrangements and its desire to chase public money to spend on care services for people who require them making it more of a quango than a charity, decided that it would be difficult to make the NAS allocate more support and services to people like myself. Instead we decided to use a local AS support group which was much more helpful and accommodating. 

Raising awareness was a high priority issue around 2000ish when there was far less knowledge of ASD but I think it is now subject to the laws of diminishing returns. What is needed now are not large scale mass awareness activities for the 'mainstream' like those from the early 2000s but smaller-scale tightly focused 'infill' awareness for the less clued up corners of society.

They didn’t, the medical community did. For a while now it’s been recognised that Asperger’s was part of the same condition as Autism, it’s a sliding scale with various common traits and different levels of impact in different areas. Medically Asperger’s was rolled up with Autism to create Autism Spectrum Disorders. ASD is medically correct in effect Asperger’s is just higher functioning autism, but the same token Autism could be regarded as lower functioning or high impairment Asperger’s.

You have missed my point. What I want to know is when did the NAS get on the AS bandwagon? If for example a person with (undiagnosed) AS was referred to the NAS in 1990 then would the NAS have identified them as having an ASD in the same way as in 2010 or would they have said that they don't have ASD? If not, then what would have been the earliest year that the NAS would have recognised them as having an ASD? Remember that many people diagnosed or suspected to have AS today who were children in the 1980s and early 1990s had (traditional) autism ruled out by psychologists even if they had a statement of SEN at school.

I think using such terms just gives an excuse for ignoring any needs we have.  'Lower functionighg' tends to give peopNTsle an excuse for ignoring any skills someone may have and forget what they may be capable of.  'High functioning' gives NTs an excuse to ignore needs someone may have.  And then to say someone has something like 'high impairment but high functioning autism' would simply confuse everyone.

Such terms are put into place by those who want to 'divide and conquer'.  They make people fight amongst themselves, suggesting that someone is not as worthy of help as someone else, or that their needs will have to be put to the back while help is concentrated on another group. 

The result of this is very little at all is done to help anyone.

Arran said:

We have to take the rough with the smooth. It would be seriously biased to restrict forums posts to positive vibes about the NAS.

I wasn't suggesting that it should only be restricted to positive posts, but I also don't see how constant negativity is in any way helpful.

Arran said:

1. Are you a member of the NAS yourself?

No, I don't see a point in being a member, that doesn't mean that I don't see a point in the NAS.

Arran said:

1. What advantage do you see for the NAS (from their point of view) to continue to provide services for people with AS and other high-functioning ASD when for years on end they have done a generally poor job of it and treat such people as low priority cases? Are you a member of the NAS yourself?

I don’t accept that they have done a generally poor job of it or treat people as low priority. Apart from the services they provide there is also the need to raise awareness, the NAS do that, not always in the way everyone likes but then you can’t please everyone.

From their point of view one of the key aims will be to understand those who do and don’t need help, some people are only here looking for advice, others want full scale engagement, there has to be a balance between what is needed, wanted and can be funded.

They didn’t, the medical community did. For a while now it’s been recognised that Asperger’s was part of the same condition as Autism, it’s a sliding scale with various common traits and different levels of impact in different areas. Medically Asperger’s was rolled up with Autism to create Autism Spectrum Disorders. ASD is medically correct in effect Asperger’s is just higher functioning autism, but the same token Autism could be regarded as lower functioning or high impairment Asperger’s.

MattBucks still hasn't answered my questions in #20. Please do so ASAP.

I'm interested to know exactly which year the NAS first recognised AS and decided that people with AS are now within their territory.

I have met 30 and 40 somethings with AS who were statemented for SEN at school, and in some cases had meetings with psychologists, but none of them were diagnosed with ASD or referred to the NAS at the time. It looks like the NAS only decided that people with AS are within its territory some time after 1990.

What were the first official or public documents produced by the NAS that specifically mention AS?

Trainspotter said:

The NAS certainly is not a 'charity' in the traditional sense of the word.  It is a commercial business, funded by the government.  And it appears that the 'charity' element is a cover to divert the attention away from the fact it is a commercial business.  A charity is perceived by the majority of the population to rely on direct donations from the public, and not be in effect be some sort of government quango.

That is very true but the public doesn't realise this. I suppose if you are at the more severe end of the spectrum and are receiving most of the services you require from the NAS then you probably don't care whether it is a charity, business, quango, run by the devil, or whatever. On the other hand, if the core services of the NAS, mostly funded by public money with strings attached, do not meet your needs and requirements then it becomes a matter of concern as to what the NAS is in reality. It is difficult for them to say that it is a charity in the traditional sense of the word.    

I have enjoyed this thread with all its twists and turns and going off totally on a tangent - as we autistics are very prone to do!

Going back to Cricket's original post, I don't know why some sort of local groups cannot be set up, either through the NAS or through some other forum. 

What harm would it do for NAS to facilitate this?  I think the cost would actually be minimal and it would also partially remove the accusation that the NAS do not really cater for adults.  And I don't really think it would be seen as creating a dating service anymore than a gardening club, or an art class is a dating service.  You may meet someone, you may not, as in any other social situation.

Autistic people have enough problem trying to 'fit in' and generally do not have a social life as that is one of the impairments that define autism.  But it wouldn't be a bad thing for them to get together and be able to talk about their interests.

This is one of the things that it would be difficult to set up on this forum without help from the NAS, ,for the simple reason that anything which helps identify someone is removed by moderators, and I'm sure saying something like 'meet under the clock tower in Autisby High Street at 9:00am on Saturday for a walk to Aspie Gardens and chat with other autistic people' would also be removed by moderators for the reason that it could be leading people into a vulneraable situation.

As regards being a 'Charity' i note that the NAS certainly knows how to charge for its courses and events,  and even membership costs are very high - certainly far too high than for me to consider joining even though I might find the magazine interesting.  The NAS certainly is not a 'charity' in the traditional sense of the word.  It is a commercial business, funded by the government.  And it appears that the 'charity' element is a cover to divert the attention away from the fact it is a commercial business.  A charity is perceived by the majority of the population to rely on direct donations from the public, and not be in effect be some sort of government quango. 

My employment is with a similarly funded 'charity' and I feel the same way about that, having been TUPEd over from the NHS, in order to save the NHS money.  In fact the cost is probably not any cheaper, it is simply coming from another 'pot' and in the eyes of Daily Mail readers the government accounts look a better if it appears that the government is giving assistance to charities.

In another of my posts I asked if National Autism Awareness Week should be more than baking cakes.  I am at a loss to think what money donated to the NAS is for apart from to help boost the salaries of the directors.  We should be seeing articles every day on television, in the newspapes and MPs should be inundated with our stories about how we are affected - after all from each of us is our own unique story, and we will not make 'everyone understand' unless our points get across.

Funding should be available for subsidised services, membership of the NAS should be at a nominal only charge for those who are affected by autism, and we should all be able to access an NHS assessment and possible diagnosis without a two year or even more wait.  I am sure if the government reduced the grant to the NAS by half and gave tha money to the NHS for assessments it would more than cover the costs.  But then, I'm sure the government does not really want everyone with Autism to be diagnosed.  That would simply show the scale of help that really was required for support of Autistic people.

That's funny because as a person with autism, I chose home education as a first choice for my NT child. Home education is way better than any school. State schools only exist so the parents can remain chained to the workplace. It's not because they're better.