Jump to content

Menu

C-rods, DragonBox Nooms, and receptive language issues (GDD, MERLD)


Recommended Posts

It's probably way too early to be worrying about this, but here I am.

 
For kids with moderate to severe receptive language issues because of GDD/ID and/or MERLD, will it majorly confuse them to use c-rods and also play DragonBox, with it's differently colored c-like-rods?
 
I have a 4yo with global delays, MERLD, coordination disorder, SPD, something very "off" about his memory, and an ever-growing list of other dx.  He functions at about the level of a 2yo, but with higher visual reception (and spatial skills by my observation) and much lower receptive language.  
 
If he were a typically developing 2yo, I would be letting him play with c-rods while supervised, working on recognizing basic shapes and colors, counting and subitizing, etc.  With him being "like" a 2yo, I am very tempted to try these things, especially playing with the c-rods since language isn't required.  
 
But what if I let him play with c-rods now and then in a year or three he starts playing DragonBox Numbers and it confuses him!?  I think he'll be ready for both long before he has the ability to understand a person trying to explain to him that the quantities are the same but colored differently.  Should I just plan to not ever let him play DragonBox?  I've considered painting our c-rods to match the Nooms...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will be okay.

 

Especially if you are introducing one much earlier than the other. I think introducing them around the same time is more of a concern.

 

If he has a good grasp/familiarity of the C-Rods when you add the game, I think it is fine.

 

Just my guess -- you may be working on quantity for a long time in a lot of different ways. Or he may surprise you and pick it up quickly.

 

But if you usually just do C-rods, I think keep in mind that you probably want to make sure you use a lot of ways to count things.

 

But I don't think that needs to be another math manipulative, but just making sure to count all kinds of different things.

 

You may be doing number sense kind of things for a longer time and with more different ways than you are used to. It can take more exposure and to more different ways of seeing something.

 

You will have to see how he personally does, but there is a concept of "generalizing skills."

 

We want kids to be very solid with certain ways to do things, and also be able to generalize the skill to a different way.

 

So it is still good to work in one way and provide consistency. But then -- you also check to see if they can do the same thing with different materials.

 

It can be common to need to really work on a skill, consistently, in more than one way, before kids start to see how they connect, and then are able to apply the concept to a new material or situation.

 

What you would see in traditional math stuff ---- it is just assumed ---- well, if the kids can do it this way, then of course they can do it that way. So that is expecting an abstract leap, where some kids may need more before they make that leap.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My ds has math SLD plus autism and apraxia, which might make him function in some ways similarly to your ds. I don't think "playing" with the c-rods will be adequate. For my ds, the autism made everything harder on top of the SLD because he had naming issues. So when he went to use the rods, you might have been saying "Add Fred and George and get Suzy" kwim? 

 

For us, Ronit Bird with her Dots ebook and then C-Rods was highly effective. It took a long while to get the c-rods nailed. Once he had them and really, really got them, then it was no trouble to do the Dragonbox apps. 

 

So my two cents is get the c-rods nailed, which may be harder than you anticipate (maybe not, but it might be), and then when they're nailed it probably won't be an issue. It's actually going to be *preferred* that you bring some flexibility into your math. You've got a child who might have some rigidity, so once you get the concepts down one way, you'd like to apply them new ways and bring in some flexibility there.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...You may be doing number sense kind of things for a longer time and with more different ways than you are used to. It can take more exposure and to more different ways of seeing something.

 

You will have to see how he personally does, but there is a concept of "generalizing skills."

 

We want kids to be very solid with certain ways to do things, and also be able to generalize the skill to a different way.

 

So it is still good to work in one way and provide consistency. But then -- you also check to see if they can do the same thing with different materials.

...

 

Yes, yes, yes. All bets are off the table with this dc. Maybe he'll be like your others, but probably not. For my ds, simple things were rocket science and complex things were easy. So understanding what is 3, that was rocket science. Adding and subtracting with positive/negative numbers, easy. And generalizing is the fancy, correct term for what I was saying. It's not enough for him to be able to understand 3 with just rods. He has to do it lots of ways till 3 means 3 everywhere. 

 

You'll get into it and see. We play a lot with our math because we're always trying to generalize. The Nooms stuff wasn't really instructional but it was fun. It could have been instructional, but I'm saying for my ds it wouldn't have been adequate instruction. But for a fun, fresh way to do it, absolutely, yeah, worth the time. All the Dragonbox apps have been good.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general with developmental delays ---- there is a lot more need for direct instruction and direct practice.

 

Learning through play and experience is still very good.

 

But there is probably more of a need for direct learning. Actually "picking things up from play" I would not expect as much.

 

But that doesn't mean not to play! Just -- there is not the same balance of parent involvement and child self-discovery.

 

But yes kids still need to figure things out in their own minds. It can just take a lot more to reach that point.

 

The big saying is that it can be harder for kids to learn from the environment. It can be harder to learn from exposure and from experience, without also having a balance of instruction.

 

What I mean is -- playing with C-Rods is still really good ---- but on his own he may not get as much out of it as you are used to. So expect him to need more support.

 

But it wouldn't be very functional to have him "overgeneralize" associating a certain color with a rod (after he had done C-rods for a while ---- bc within the context of C-rods, yes that is good!).

 

"Overgeneralizing" is when kids learn something kind-of wrong. So I don't think this would ever happen -- but you don't want kids TOO attached to a color meaning a certain number. Like -- don't worry about it for C-rods.

 

But you want there to be an understanding that "it's not about the color."

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest -- you may want to check out some autism books. Autism is (relatively) common, so there are books about it. Your exact mix will be harder to find books about. But just with higher visual, lower receptive language ---- you will probably find some helpful info form autism books, and then some won't apply.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My MERLD child has no confusion going from c-rods to MUS blocks. As long as you're not introducing them at the same time, it should be fine. I will echo the heads up from the other posters - my ds must be explicitly taught and he does not generalize. Hopefully those things won't be issues for your ds, but it might mean that c-rod play looks a bit (or a lot!) different than it did with your other kids.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I say I play, it isn't random. We're using the lessons from Ronit Bird, so it's really explicit instruction, directed, intentional, just in a format of play and discovery. 

 

To learn via random play assumes the ability to infer and to figure out cause/effect. My ds was really, really glitchy on cause/effect, not making connections, so you couldn't assume that the inferences and deductions that lead to normal learning through play would happen. They certainly weren't happening for my ds. He's got a gifted IQ btw. It's just the autism and those pieces that were missing. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the thoughts, guys.  This is all very helpful.

 

I'm trying to learn more about memory and processing.  Something really funky is definitely going on that I don't feel is fully explained by GDD, MERLD, or any of his other dx.  I suspect that under all the delays, DS#4 is really quite bright.  I've been gently told basically not to hope too much, but some of the things I've seen really make me wonder.  He can make some surprisingly complex designs with our Magnatiles, at least age appropriate, and now that he's finally playing imaginatively I am often surprised by his creativity.  

 

But, for example, he ask's "Wussis?" about everyday objects over and over and over and over and OVER and over daily. Actual conversation from earlier this week that I wrote down to share with his DP:

DS#4: Wassis?

Me: Chair.  Chair.

DS#4: Oh!  This a chair.

15 seconds later...

DS#4: Mama, wassis?

Me: Chair.  That's a chair.

DS#4: It names is chair. Chairy chairy chairy!

Me: Yes, chair.  It is a chair.

15 seconds later..

DS#4: Wassis?

Me: Chair.  Chair.  

DS#4: Chair

10 seconds later...

DS#4: Mama, this a chair?

Me: Yes, it's a chair.

DS#4: This my chair.  This my chair.  My my my.

20 seconds later...

DS#4: Mama, wassis?

 

If what I've heard from his therapists is correct, DS#4 does have trouble generalizing, but when he does, he often way overgeneralizes.  He seems to be good at broadly categorizing.  For example, he understands that fork, spoon, bowl, plate, and cup are all objects used for eating.  If I tell him to "Get a plate," if he responds at all, he will definitely bring me one of these items, but it's almost as likely to be a fork or a cup as to be a plate.  He randomly points to countable objects (and other things like the white wall or his empty plate) and "counts" by saying a string of number words.  Some bits are in order and most are not, but he only says number words when he does this.  So he gets that certain words belong in the number category and are supposed to be said together, he just can't distinguish between them or understand what they mean.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had a stage where people working with him were like oh no, it's not autism, it's not autism, but all the answers were coming from the autism community. When they don't make that step, they keep you out of the loop of the funding and the most detailed interventions. 

 

I'm not saying it is autism. I'm just saying for us we later did get that diagnosis and I can look back and go wow we would have been in a better stream if we had been in the autism stream of interventions all along.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had a stage where people working with him were like oh no, it's not autism, it's not autism, but all the answers were coming from the autism community. When they don't make that step, they keep you out of the loop of the funding and the most detailed interventions. 

 

I'm not saying it is autism. I'm just saying for us we later did get that diagnosis and I can look back and go wow we would have been in a better stream if we had been in the autism stream of interventions all along.

 

I'm going to be looking into ASD interventions for sure.  At least some are bound to be helpful since he has so much ASD-like behavior, though he seems to lack the the classic social issues (he makes great eye contact, seeks interactions, enjoys physical affection, shows things to people, has separation anxiety and stranger fears, references me in novel situations, etc.).  He had ASD-specific testing at 3.5yo and the evaluator said the results were technically inconclusive, but she felt with 95% certainty he wasn't on the spectrum and that his low social skills were limited by his communication.  She said to come back in a year if we were still concerned, and added MERLD to his chart.  All of his therapists and specialists and doctors have said similar things.  They don't think he seems very spectrum-y.  We did a second-opinion eval for speech and language a few months ago and there was a section in the report that said his pattern of language was not consistent with the language patterns seen in ASD but with a language disorder instead.  I suppose we'll drop another $2k to have him reevaluated for ASD in another couple of years though, just in case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a suggestion -- you could sort and label your dishes. When kids sort they can see what the definition of a category is.

 

If it is hard you can start with just two things and just ask him to point at (say) the plate out of a choice of a bowl and a plate.

 

This can be an easier way to help kids learn words.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing is, he could be wanting to interact with you and not have a lot of language to use to chat. You can try talking to him about things and ask little easy questions; if he likes that sometimes he could be wanting to talk to you in some way and the easiest way on his side is to keep saying "what's that?"

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing is, he could be wanting to interact with you and not have a lot of language to use to chat. You can try talking to him about things and ask little easy questions; if he likes that sometimes he could be wanting to talk to you in some way and the easiest way on his side is to keep saying "what's that?"

 

Yes, this!  Not saying it isn't a memory or processing issue, but my oldest was glitchy with language as a toddler/ preschooler.  Even after she started talking, she had a hard time with questions.  For a long time, she just didn't ask any.  And then, the only question she asked was, "Where are we going?"  Every time we got in the car, she would ask, "Where are we going?"  I'd tell her.  10 seconds later..."Where are we going?"  In her case, it was absolutely a desire to converse, but no skill at small talk. 

 

I don't know if she's unusual or not, but when she got the hang of language, it was rock star solid, and she's been well above age level since about age 3.5 or 4.  But she was pretty behind for a long while there.  She actually learned a lot of her questioning and language skills from her sister, who is 17 months later but verbally precocious, who in a fit of great irony, has been diagnosed as "autistic-ish," although it seems like the results look like autism but the cause is anxiety. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to learn more about memory and processing. Something really funky is definitely going on that I don't feel is fully explained by GDD, MERLD, or any of his other dx. I suspect that under all the delays, DS#4 is really quite bright. I've been gently told basically not to hope too much, but some of the things I've seen really make me wonder. He can make some surprisingly complex designs with our Magnatiles, at least age appropriate, and now that he's finally playing imaginatively I am often surprised by his creativity..

Just my $0.02 and you can take it or leave it, but with a complex child like this, I would push your doctors about having whole exome sequencing genetic testing done. I wish we had done it years ago because I had always felt like you about there being more going on than was explained by all the "alphabet soup" of diagnoses we got from all the various doctors and therapists.

 

In terms of the math, I agree with the PP about systematic, explicit instruction and making sure the child generalizes the understanding that 3 = 3 = 3 no matter the surface characteristics like color

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Crimson said, with so many genetic paths into what is overall called "autism" it's really a mistake to get too hung up on the label. And once you introduce high IQ, it gets even funkier and you get these weird situations where it's clearly a problem, clearly not developing typically, but also clearly you're seeing the brilliance of the child in trying to find ways around it.

 

My ds, when he was tiny (like 9 months old) would sit on my lap and pull pins out while I sewed, one by one, as we sewed up to them on the machine. It seemed so normal for him that I didn't realize how ASTONISHINGLY atypical that was. Turned out he just had this amazing brain energy (from the IQ) that was trying to go SOMEWHERE, ANYWHERE, and it went to extremely precocious fine motor. Before he was 2 he had recognizable letters of writing. I mean, it was just CRAZY. We started speech therapy, redirected that brain energy, and he started leveling out.

 

So it's really, really a mistake to get caught up saying he's so brilliant in one way that it can't be xyz. What matters is what the deficits are, where the energy is not going, where the development is not happening. What matters is getting connected to tools, materials, and services that help you get the energy flowing to those areas so those areas ALSO develop. They're not going to happen accidentally or incidentally, just because the dc is brilliant. Well I say that, and yet there are plenty of people who don't intervene, decide to leave the imbalances, and they just roll with it. For me, the cost of that was too high. I wanted more balance to his development. I wanted him to have speech as well as fine motor as well as... 

 

I have no clue where this was going. I spit on the DSM. It's so far behind, so not evidence-based, someday we'll look back and realize how piggish and archaic it really is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just my $0.02 and you can take it or leave it, but with a complex child like this, I would push your doctors about having whole exome sequencing genetic testing done. I wish we had done it years ago because I had always felt like you about there being more going on than was explained by all the "alphabet soup" of diagnoses we got from all the various doctors and therapists.

 

In terms of the math, I agree with the PP about systematic, explicit instruction and making sure the child generalizes the understanding that 3 = 3 = 3 no matter the surface characteristics like color

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Genetics refuses to do WES.  They say that it's too expensive and usually doesn't turn up anything useful, that even for kids with multiple congenital anomalies the rate of WES finding anything is only like 20%.  We go back again in November, but I fully expect them to tell us to just follow up again in 12 months.  I feel like we've hit a dead end searching for an explanation and just have to work on finding effective interventions for the labels he's got.

Edited by Lace
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...