Category — ADHD: Education

PART TWO OF THREE

Entertainment vs. learning
Entertainment is usually a passive act that includes an activity which provides a distraction to everyday events or provides amusement. A good example of entertainment is watching a movie or concert. However, one may also actively participate in recreational entertainment  such as playing video games or sports. One does not participate in an entertaining activity to be educated. That is far from the goal of entertainment. In fact, we participate in entertainment to be relieved of having to work, having to learn, or having to be actively engaged for those purposes. We seek entertainment for fun and pleasure.

Entertainment is a vast industry. The modern American video game industry made about $18.85 billion on video-game hardware, software, and accessories in 2007. That’s nearly twice what movie theaters made and triple what the video game industry made in 2000. Most authorities on video games estimate that 70 to 80 percent of boys and approximately 20 percent of girls play video games daily.

Learning is on the other end of the spectrum from entertainment. In order to learn, we need attention, challenge, and deliberate practice. We need to be actively engaged. To apply the mind with the intent of long-term retention, assimilation, and application of new information. This implies both effort and commitment. While we may employ some of these elements, the purpose is far different in a learning environment. The purpose of learning in Star Trek: Bridge Commander is to keep the ship from exploding by using the controls correctly.  Learning is there to benefit your game play.  While this takes some reasoning and trial and error, is this useful in the classroom or at the office? Not likely. It’s not likely transferrable or to generalize either unless your child’s job is commanding Star Fleet.

If I may paraphrase the late martial artist and film legend Bruce Lee, you cannot learn to swim by kicking your legs and stroking with your arms on land. You have to jump in the water. You cannot learn to run a marathon by jogging around the track. 

In other words, if we want to learn something, it has to be taught with a purpose or aim, and we have to practice it deliberately to improve. If we closely examine what video games our spouse, child, or clients are playing, then we might just be alarmed at the violence, the lack of humanity, and gratuitous sex involved.

The most popular video games are those that are visually intense and graphically frenetic. It’s important to mention here that paying attention to visually stimulating and frenetic activity is another hallmark of an ADHD individual. Offer a 3-ring circus and their brain is quite capable of attending to it. Ask them to clean their room, a much less stimulating activity, and it’s very difficult. This predisposition towards highly stimulating activities seems to involve the brain’s reward and gratification systems as well as its processing and other regulatory systems.

Thus, a high stimulation Xbox or Play Station game is quite satisfying; ADHD individuals can hyperfocus on these games for hours on end. What does that teach? Research tells us that people who play these games do learn visual recognition skills, i.e. they can rapidly determine the number of opposing characters on screen far faster than the average human being. So, if the only thing they’re going to be is a fighter pilot, then these games might be suitable.

Other research tells us that if one chronically plays these games (chronically would be classified as one hour or more per day), one is more likely to report lower grades at school, diminished attention at school, and a greater probability of being addicted to these games or the Internet itself. Good Japanese research also noted that entertaining, highly stimulating video games that involve little else than pointing and shooting can lower both the metabolic rate and EEG in the frontal lobes of the brain. The frontal lobes, among other capacities, govern attention, aggression, and impulsivity. This is important to know especially if you have an ADHD person in your household using these games.

It seems that most ADHD children and adults are prewired to pay attention to overly stimulation things. That seems to be a hallmark of the trait. They frequently become hyperfocused on them for hours at a time. Taking these games away is probably not practical. However, limiting play time is quite sensible.

If one is to learn skills, techniques, or methods that will strengthen the brain, then the video game must be quite different than the Xbox or Play Station most popular list.

Upcoming, part 3, Play Attention vs. off the shelf video games.

In late 2009, the University of Hertfordshire in the United Kingdom performed a study on Play Attention. Children in the school system near the university used Play Attention 3 days per week for twelve weeks.  Also see: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100107083904.htm

We’ll discuss this study at our free webinar on January 13th. Please register here to attend.

These students were compared to a control group of students who did not use the system.  Play Attention students showed significant improvement in behavior and attention. One of the authors of the study said:

“Children with a diagnosis of ADHD find it hard to control their impulses and inhibit inappropriate behaviour,” said Professor Pine, “This can lead to educational and behavioural difficulties. The Play Attention method may prevent long-term problems by helping the children to be less impulsive and more self-controlled.”

The study will be published in a peer reviewed journal shortly.  The full press release from the University of Hertfordshire:

New Treatment for Hyperactivity in Children

07 January 2010 Hertfordshire, University of

A new thought-operated computer system which can reduce the symptoms of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children will be rolled out across the UK this month.

Professor Karen Pine at the University of Hertfordshire’s School of Psychology and assistant Farjana Nasrin investigated the effects of EEG (Electroencephalography) biofeedback, a learning strategy that detects brain waves, on ten children with an attention deficit from Hertfordshire schools

They used a system called Play Attention, supplied by not-for-profit community interest company, Games for Life, three times a week for twelve weeks.

The system involves the child playing a fun educational computer game whilst wearing a helmet similar to a bicycle helmet. The helmet picks up their brain activity in the form of EEG waves related to attention. As long as the child concentrates they control the games, but as soon as their attention waivers the game stops.

The researchers found at the end of the study that the children’s impulsive behaviour was reduced, compared to a control group who had not used the system.

“Children with a diagnosis of ADHD find it hard to control their impulses and inhibit inappropriate behaviour,” said Professor Pine, “This can lead to educational and behavioural difficulties. The Play Attention method may prevent long-term problems by helping the children to be less impulsive and more self-controlled.”

Professor Pine and Dr Rob Sharp a senior specialist educational psychologist are continuing to work on futuristic projects with Ian Glasscock, Managing Director of Games for Life. A means of assessing learning in children with
severe communication and physical difficulties by a thought-controlled computer game method is likely to have considerable potential for these children who cannot operate a computer manually.

“Attention-related difficulties including ADHD affects many children, young people and adults and has a significant impact on their lives,” said Mr Glasscock. "Mind-controlled educational computer games technology is the only intervention shown to reduce the core symptoms of ADHD, historically medication may have been prescribed for the child.”

Games for Life plans to roll out this new system across the UK this month.

Researchers, Dr. Zylowska, et al from the University of California-Los Angeles conducted a feasibility study of an 8-week mindfulness training program for adults and adolescents with ADHD. Their report was published in The Journal of Attention Disorders (2008 May;11(6):737-46. Epub 2007 Nov 19).

The researchers sought to inquire whether mindfulness meditation could improve attention, reduce stress, and improve mood. The researchers recruited 34 adults and 8 adolescents. Study participants were given a weekly training session. They were also required to practice daily starting with 5 minutes of meditation per day and gradually increasing to 15 minutes per day.

The majority of participants (after dropouts) reported improvements in self-reported ADHD symptoms. Independent tests on tasks measuring attention and cognitive inhibition also indicated improved symptom outcomes. Improvements in anxiety and depressive symptoms were also observed.

In yet another pilot study conducted by Sarina J. Grosswald, Ed.D., a George Washington University-trained cognitive learning specialist, a group of middle school students with ADHD were required to meditate twice a day in school. After three months, researchers found over 50 percent reduction in stress and anxiety and improvements in ADHD symptoms.

"The effect was much greater than we expected," said Sarina J. Grosswald, Ed.D., a George Washington University-trained cognitive learning specialist and lead researcher on the study. "The children also showed improvements in attention, working memory, organization, and behavior regulation."

Due to the neuroplasticity of the brain, better attention can be attained through meditation. Buddhist monks have been doing it for centuries. This seems to be true of ADHD persons as well. However, it is quite apparent that attention difficulties are just the tip of the ADHD iceberg. Other skills including organization, filtering out distractions, memory, time on-task, motor skills, visual tracking, etc, are typically diminished in ADHD persons. A complete program like Play Attention is required to teach these skills.

As for meditation, it is likely a good supplement to training in the aforementioned skill areas, but given the nature of the cited studies, a controlled clinical study is warranted.

As I wrote earlier, the longest study actually performed while following live children was the MTA and its 3-Year Follow-up of the NIMH MTA (multi-modal treatment) recently published in the journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

Co-author, Professor William Pelham, of the University at Buffalo, says: “The children had a substantial decrease in their rate of growth so they weren’t growing as much as other kids both in terms of their height and in terms of their weight. And the second was that there were no beneficial effects – none.”

Pelham adds, “In the short run [medication] will help the child behave better, in the long run it won’t. And that information should be made very clear to parents.”

Here’s the most telling observation of the study: “I think that we exaggerated the beneficial impact of medication in the first study. We had thought that children medicated longer would have better outcomes. That didn’t happen to be the case. There’s no indication that medication’s better than nothing in the long run.”

It’s obvious that this information was not good for the pharmaceutical industry. As is now common practice, a study will be launched to counter this kind of negative press. So, it was no surprise that the respected Mayo Clinic released a study two months later that “…reveals that compared to children without AD/HD, children with ADHD are at risk for poor long-term school outcomes such as low achievement in reading, absenteeism, repeating a grade, and dropping out of school. Both studies appear in the current edition of the Journal of Development & Behavioral Pediatrics, (http://www.jrnldbp.com).”

“In this study, treatment with stimulant medication during childhood was associated with more favorable long-term school outcomes,” explains William Barbaresi, M.D., Mayo Clinic pediatrician and lead author of the reports.

The MTA study focused on real families in real-time. The researchers were able to observe family dynamics, environment, pharmacological interventions and their relationships to academic and behavioral outcomes. This, of course, takes a significant amount of time and field researchers.

According to the Mayo Clinic Press Release, “The two Mayo Clinic studies are the first population-based, long-term studies to investigate links between ADHD, school performance and factors that modify long-term school performance of children with ADHD.”

Here’s how research like this works: researchers are given access to school files and medical records. They select and review data from files to draw their conclusions. This is becoming more popular than live research because it is less expensive, doesn’t require a significant number of field researchers, and can be done in less time. Unlike real-time research like the MTA, the Mayo study’s limitations are significant; it doesn’t allow real-time access to families or teachers to gain information regarding environment, family issues, etc; to interpret information; or to clarify written information. So the researchers are fairly limited to test scores and medical records. While this makes it easy to prepare and select data, it falls far short the information gather by a real-time study.

The Mayo study press release summarizes the research:

Dr. Barbaresi believes that both studies provide the first solid evidence of the long-term negative academic performance associated with untreated ADHD – as well as evidence for the best way to manage this problem. Dr. Barbaresi says, “The finding that treatment with stimulant medications is associated with long-term improvement in school outcomes is significant. Previously, there was evidence that treatment with stimulant medications improved short-term academic performance, but there was no good evidence that long-term outcomes are better with stimulant treatment. Our data can guide clinicians in their efforts to help children with ADHD succeed in school.”

Note that no mention is made of height and weight loss of children in the Mayo Clinic study as was found by the MTA. Furthermore it also directly contradicts information released by the MTA. Here’s the rub, funding for the Mayo study was contributed by grants from the U.S. Public Health Service; National Institutes of Health; Mayo Clinic Foundation for Biomedical Research; and McNeil Consumer and Specialty Pharmaceuticals.

Obviously the one extraordinary contributor was McNeil Consumer and Specialty Pharmaceuticals. McNeil is the producer of Concerta, a stimulant medication for ADHD. Is it likely that McNeil would contribute to a study that would indicate weight loss and stunted growth from use of its product? Not likely.

Would McNeil contribute to a study whose researchers said, “I think that we exaggerated the beneficial impact of medication in the first study. We had thought that children medicated longer would have better outcomes. That didn’t happen to be the case. There’s no indication that medication’s better than nothing in the long run.” Not likely.

It is a direct conflict of interest for a pharmaceutical company to participate in research with universities, hospitals, or other entities. I’ve never seen negative information released from a study performed by a pharmaceutical company on their own drug. Strange, isn’t it?

PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAM SHOWN TO IMPROVE KEY COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS, SELF-CONTROL

The following press release from the University of British Columbia maintains that a research study has demonstrated that cognitive training can improve attentional control, impulse control, and other executive functions.

Furthermore, the study’s authors cite that practice of cognitive skills in early development years may decrease incidence of ADHD. I have insisted that this was possible for nearly a decade.

Complicating this matter is the No Child Left Behind act (“NCLB”). It is my belief that the NCLB has added to the ADHD problem due in part to the program’s rigid adherence to test scores based on a watered down curriculum that forces teachers to teach the test. Subjects are taught quickly requiring rote memorization rather than significant reasoning or logical application. Additionally, teachers seldom have time to individualize curriculum or nurture students with learning disabilities like ADHD. Thus, rather than encouraging cognitive skills and the development of attention, NCLB has helped promote diffused attention while simultaneously discouraging the development of cognitive skills.

NCLB has also decreased recess time, children’s access to the arts like music and drama, and even physical education. Research has clearly demonstrated increased abilities in mathematics and other academic subjects when students are involved in music and the arts.

The press release:

Program Promises Improvement in Academic Achievement for Children of Poor Families

An innovative curriculum for preschoolers may improve academic performance, reduce diagnoses of attention deficient hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and close the achievement gap between children from poor families and those from wealthier homes, according to research led by a Vancouver neuroscientist who is an expert on the development of the cognitive functions that depend on the prefrontal cortex area of the brain, called executive functions (EFs).

University of British Columbia Psychiatry Prof. Adele Diamond, who is Canada Research Chair in Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, led the first evaluation of a curriculum called Tools of the Mind (Tools) that focuses on EFs. These functions include resisting distraction, giving a more considered response instead of your first impulse, working with information you are holding in mind, and the mental flexibility to think “outside the box.”

The program was developed over the last 12 years by educational psychologists Deborah Leong and Elena Bodrova and has been used in several U.S. states. Its value in improving EFs has not been determined until now.

The study is published in this week’s issue of Science.

“EFs are critical for success in school and life. These skills are rarely taught, but can be, even to preschoolers. It could make a huge difference, especially for disadvantaged children,” says Diamond, who is a member of the Brain Research Centre at UBC Hospital; the Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Dept. at BC Children’s Hospital; the Child & Family Research Institute (CFRI); and the Human Early Learning Partnership (HELP). Her work is also supported by Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute and BC Mental Health and Addiction Services.

“The recent explosion in diagnoses of ADHD may be partly due to some children never learning to exercise attentional control and self-discipline,” says Diamond.

“Although some children are strongly biologically predisposed to hyperactivity and wouldn’t benefit from training, others may be misdiagnosed because what they actually need are skills in self-regulation.”

Previous research has shown that EFs are stronger predictors of academic performance than IQ, she adds. Children from lower-income families enter school with disproportionately poor EF skills and fall progressively farther behind in school each year – facts which Diamond says are related and correctible.

“Helping at-risk children improve EF skills early might be critical to closing the achievement gap and reducing societal inequalities. We showed EFs can be improved in preschoolers without fancy equipment and by regular teachers in regular public school classrooms.”

Most interventions target consequences of poor self-control rather than seeking prevention at an early age, as does Tools. “Early intervention – heading off problems before they develop – costs far less and achieves far better results than trying to correct problems once they have developed,” Diamond says.

“If throughout the school-day EFs are supported and progressively challenged, benefits generalize and transfer to new activities. Daily EF ‘exercise’ appears to enhance and accelerate brain development much as physical exercise improves our bodies,” she adds.

The research team, which includes investigators from the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University in New Jersey, evaluated 147 five-year-olds in a low-income, urban U.S. school district. Researchers compared Tools with a balanced literacy curriculum (dBL) that covered the same academic content as Tools but without a focus on EF.

Both programs were new, instituted at the same time and used identical resources. Children and teachers in Tools and dBL were randomly assigned and teachers had equivalent levels of education and teaching experience. The children in both curricula were from the same neighborhood and ethnic group, and from families with very similar levels of income and parental education. Children received either Tools or dBL for one to two years.

Evaluation involved two computerized tests that measured EF. These tasks were different from anything any of the children had done before. Better performance by children in Tools shows that they were able to generalize and transfer their EF skills to new situations.

Tools encourages out-loud self-instruction and dramatic play. “Preschool teachers are under pressure to limit play and spend more time on instruction but social pretend play may be more critical to academic success,” says Diamond.

Note: I’ve lectured on this subject for over 10 years. This will be the first time I’ve placed my collective thoughts into print. I’ll present the topic as a series of essays.

The Soviet Menace vs. Dennis the Menace

In the late 1950s, when Dennis the Menace was just beginning to annoy his neighbor, Mr. Wilson, certain dynamics would once again change the face of education; our nemesis, the Soviet Union, launched Sputnik. The Soviet Sputnik program involved the launch of a series of man-made satellites after testing their viability through unmanned space vehicles. The cold-war fear of the Soviet Union and their possible nuclear superiority also led to the creation of NASA.

Sputnik prompted the U.S. government to increase spending on scientific research and education. This led to the National Defense Education Act (NDEA). The NDEA provided federal money for increased instruction in math & science, as well as foreign language. Another important feature of the NDEA was the forgiveness of loans for higher education; educational expenses for prospective elementary and secondary teachers could be waived. The thrust of the NDEA also reasserted emphasis on academic fundamentals like reading, writing, and arithmetic.

So, now children in the Henry Ford production line model of education, tempered by John Dewey’s experiential, nurturing educational philosophy, were exposed to changes to curriculum based on society’s fear of satellites. Strangely enough, even with the crazy dynamics of the times, children with attention problems existed; however, they were viewed quite differently than today’s ADHD children and actually survived and thrived quite well. Nurturing was expected and practiced at school, boundaries were set and maintained; if you got in trouble at school, you were likely to be in twice as much trouble when you got home. Furthermore, without the demands of incredibly stringent testing in all grades, ADHD children could were not exposed to the demands currently place on them.

But this would change within a decade or so. Due to the emphasis on science and math, curriculum began to be pushed downward. What was once taught at first year university was now being pushed to junior and senior years in high school. Junior and senior high curriculums were pushed downward as well. Over the years, this chain of curriculum change found its way all down to kindergarten. More tests were now needed to assess whether the curriculum changes initiated by both federal and state mandates were making our children smarter and more competitive with the rest of the world.

Another dynamic was causing social change. With an ensuing space race and advancing technology, a new core value system was in play; happiness comes through owning material things like new technology or the next best automobile. To get more things and therefore be happy, one had to make more money. To make more money one had to pursue higher education. To get the opportunity to pursue higher education, make more money, and be happy, one had to perform better at school.

I won’t argue philosophically about material goods bringing happiness, but most research indicates this is not so. What’s important to note here is that we have a definite class system in place; those who perform well at school have access to higher education and happiness, and those who are cast out of higher education to go to technical or trade schools, make less money and are less happy. That’s the perception, anyway.

The other articles in the series “The Evolution of ADHD, Education, and Drugs in America” can be found below.

1. Dennis the Menace
2. Henry Ford and Education
3. Henry Ford vs. Dennis the Menace
4. Soviet Menace vs. Dennis the Menace
5. Sigmund Freud vs. Dennis the Menace

Note: I’ve lectured on this subject for over 10 years. This will be the first time I’ve placed my collective thoughts into print. I’ll present the topic as a series of essays.

Henry Ford vs. Dennis the Menace

Dennis the Menace began appearing as a comic strip character in the early 1950s. While his physical appearance changed slightly in the 1960s and 1970s, he was still considered a lovable child when I began my teaching career in the mid 1980s. We continued to laugh at his innocent acts of menace toward his family and friends without mention of medication or ADHD.

When I met my Dennis, or John, in the late 1980s, I was astonished that he was viewed by the other staff as ‘uncontrollable’ and ‘unteachable.’ He was considered a problem child. John was a square peg trying to fit in the round hole of an educational machine. The educational world had less tolerance for children like John, and ADHD was about to was about vastly change education – not necessarily for the better.

What had in fact affected John in the 1980s had its roots in much earlier times. A confluence of events was actually creating the perfect storm for the Ritalin revolution. Change was underway in education, mental health, and medicine that produced an enormous shift in American culture. This shift would greatly affect John and all children like him.

Dennis the Menace was not yet created in the early 1930s when Henry Ford’s efficient production line model was adopted into public education. In mass fashion, children were taught in classrooms with rows, using state issued textbooks, aggregately reciting the pledge of allegiance, and instructed at the same pace with the same curriculum by the same teacher. We now had efficient education for the masses.

This model was somewhat tempered by philosopher John Dewey. Dewey received his Ph.D from the School of Arts & Sciences at Johns Hopkins University in 1884. However, his theoretical basis for his Pragmatic school of thought was developed during his tenure at the newly founded University of Chicago beginning in 1899. The Pragmatic school of thought embraced an empirically based theory of knowledge which was further refined at the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools. Dewey developed his ideas for education based on his work at the Laboratory Schools and published Experience and Education in 1938 after many other books. Dewey emphasized a humanistic approach to education where development of problem solving and critical thinking skills were fundamental and paramount to increasing intellect. This contradicted the traditional practice of rote memorization. His philosophy of education also embraced individualization and accounted for the needs and differences among students. This was based upon Dewey’s vision that while a student is a small part of society, they student will in turn strengthen democratic society if he is a critical thinker and problem solver. This is analogous to the pilings in a bride; the stronger the pilings, the stronger the bridge.

While Dewey’s pedagogy was not officially adopted by schools, his influence affected national education for a long period and created an environment where nurturing and experience played important roles in rearing children. This would soon change.

The other articles in the series “The Evolution of ADHD, Education, and Drugs in America” can be found below.

1. Dennis the Menace
2. Henry Ford and Education
3. Henry Ford vs. Dennis the Menace
4. Soviet Menace vs. Dennis the Menace
5. Sigmund Freud vs. Dennis the Menace

Note: I’ve lectured on this subject for over 10 years. This will be the first time I’ve placed my collective thoughts into print. I’ll present the topic as a series of essays.

Henry Ford and Education

The great industrialist and inventor, Henry Ford founded his company on precision and efficiency in the early 1900s. To produce cars for the masses, he would need a method of assembly that could quickly assemble mass produced parts into a complete automobile. His assembly line model rapidly changed the world. Using the assembly/production line model, mass assembly of products became the norm. This in turn produced higher volumes of products available to the masses. Mass production allowed manufacturers to sell products for cheaper prices as well. All of this was based on efficiency. Educationalists were impressed.

Prior to the early 20th century and the assembly line, manufacture was performed by a single craftsman or team of craftsmen. Known as the English System, craftsmen typically would produce each part of a product individually. In the final phase of production, the craftsmen would assemble the components together into a single product. At that time, if changes were needed to the individual parts, the craftsmen would modify the parts to make them fit or work together. While this process was slow and did not produce mass quantities of goods, it produced high quality goods with attention to detail. This practice was similar to our method of teaching in rural one-room school houses where students sat together on benches.

If we envision a student as a basic raw component, like a car chassis, and following the production line model, we could get his wheels on by the end of kindergarten. In first grade we insert the engine. In second grade we put in the brakes. In fourth grade we put on the body. Thus, by the end of high school, we should have a completed student or car as it were.

There would be a need then, to make this process efficient. There would be no more need for small school houses. Big schools would be built where large numbers of students could be housed. Mass transportation would have to be implemented to ensure that large numbers of students could be assembled in the larger schools. Students should sit in rows as this would make it more efficient for the teacher when handing out mass produced work sheets and tests. There would be no need for individualized instruction when a generalized curriculum would fit. By senior year in high school, those students not prepared to move on to higher education (defective parts) can be diverted to technical schools to prepare them for work in the service industry.

And that’s what we did in the early 1900s.

The other articles in the series “The Evolution of ADHD, Education, and Drugs in America” can be found below.

1. Dennis the Menace
2. Henry Ford and Education
3. Henry Ford vs. Dennis the Menace
4. Soviet Menace vs. Dennis the Menace
5. Sigmund Freud vs. Dennis the Menace

Note: I’ve lectured on this subject for over 10 years. This will be the first time I’ve placed my collective thoughts into print. I’ll present the topic as a series of essays.

Dennis the Menace

Anyone remember Dennis the Menace? As a child, I watched Jay North portray that mischievous blond-headed boy who always got into trouble and annoyed his grumpy neighbor. Dennis was loved back then.

Dennis is the kid everyone seems to have on his street even now. He’s intelligent and uses it to get into everything. Even when he tries to help others out, he still finds trouble. He often acts out without thinking about consequences.

I taught ‘Dennis’ during my second year as a classroom teacher in the North Carolina school system in the mid 1980s. His real name was John. John was the type of boy that the other teachers called ‘hellion’ in hushed whisper in the faculty lounge. The other teachers told me that, “He won’t do anything. Tie a carrot to the end of a stick; he’ll play with it all year.” Instead of being that character we all loved, ‘Dennis’ was medicated.

Being a progressive teacher and not having become cynical, I was determined to save John. Since I had learned nothing at university about unfocused, hyperactive children, I consulted my professors. They advised me to move John closer to my desk; set up an individualized education plan (IEP) that included modifications to John’s curriculum, shortened assignments and instructions; and a daily checklist with rewards.

I followed their instructions implicitly. John sat right next to my desk. The modifications to his curriculum quickly began to change John’s self-esteem. We got work done everyday and his math and reading ability began to improve. His parents, however, only had eighth grade educations. They failed to return John’s checklist after a couple of days. They also didn’t have the skills to provide positive reinforcement at home. To my dismay, John’s father began to hit him with a leather belt. Corporal punishment was still used at school, so this wasn’t unusual, even though I didn’t approve.

A few days later, John came in and placed his forehead on his desk behind folded arms.

No more than three feet from my right hand, I nudged him and said, “Didn’t you get enough sleep last night?”

He looked up at me without the mischievous twinkle, his eyes a little bloodshot. He pushed a folded note at me across my desk. “Medicine,” he said.

The note was from John’s family doctor. It was actually a checklist for me to complete that would assist the doctor in determining dosage. I completed 4 checklists without seeing much change in John’s groggy demeanor. The hellion was gone, his spark was gone, but he was manageable at home. At least John’s father wasn’t beating him anymore.

The other articles in the series “The Evolution of ADHD, Education, and Drugs in America” can be found below.

1. Dennis the Menace
2. Henry Ford and Education
3. Henry Ford vs. Dennis the Menace
4. Soviet Menace vs. Dennis the Menace
5. Sigmund Freud vs. Dennis the Menace