Term Paper

Kyle Mountcastle Soriano EN-290 27 April 2016 The Autistic Chasm: Bridging the Gap Between ASD Writers and Neurotypical Demands In college writing, Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) students are disadvantaged due to neurological issues. ASD students struggle to write academic papers that are sufficiently coherent, concise, cohesive, and complete. Grammar and syntax deficits may cause ASD students to organize their papers in an illogical way. The inability to think beyond one’s perspective produces writer-based papers that do not address any rhetorical situation. This paper will explore why this and issues in the writing process occur; methods that can help ASD students see beyond themselves, and the academic implications of empathy for ASD students. ASD adults are locked within their own perspective, which means that they treat all writing like a personal journal, as suggested in Heather M. Brown’s article titled “Exploring the Persuasive Writing Skills of Students with High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder.” Brown references brain research and her own research to support this claim in the following excerpt: It is well documented that individuals with HFASD struggle to master the pragmatics of language, that is, the conventions or rules governing language use for the purpose of communication (Groen, Zwiers, van der Gaag, & Buitelaar, 2008; Helland, Biringer, Helland, & Heimann, 2012;

2 Tager-Flusberg, 1999, 2006). For example, children and adolescents with HFASD tend to: (a) lecture about their own interests; (b) introduce irrelevant comments into conversation; and (c) have difficulty initiating, elaborating and expanding conversational topics (Burke, 2005; Church, Alisanski, & Amanullah, 2000; Groen et al., 2008; Tager-Flusberg, 1996, 1999) (Brown 1.1). Here, Brown cites numerous articles on documentation of language difficulties of ASD adults. Autistic thinking shapes writing because of writing’s involvement with various sections of the brain. The brain-wirings of an ASD student cause them to write writer-based papers (Brown 1.2). Writer-based papers do not consider a rhetorical situation or audience; rather, such papers exhibit a writer’s interests and ideas without any further explanation or support. In another article written by Brown, research on ASD boys exhibits poorer “narrative and expository texts, and narratives of shorter length” (Brown 1464). These issues relate to a concept called “theory of mind,” in which ASD individuals cannot determine their or others’ mental states (Brown 1465). Brown believes that this phenomenon could impair the “ability to write about thoughts and feelings…. A conversational partner with new, relevant information…. The writers’ ability to take the perspective of the reader,” and, “in oral language, performance on ToM tasks is correlated with basic aspects of language such as grammar and semantics. (Brown 1465)” Overall, ASD students struggle to grasp writing standards that neurotypical students take for granted.

3 In an article by Lisa Meeks and Elise Geither, the challenges of the writing process for ASD students is presented: However, for other students, this is simply a messy phase that results in a vast amount of information and uncertainty. This information must be tamed and organised to fit within the confines of the required assignment. Because this step actually includes numerous “sub-steps” and various ways of approaching prewriting, it is easy to see how autistic students can become overwhelmed during this first step (Geither 80). Here, it is clear that ASD students cannot imagine sub-steps that are involved in most processes, let alone something as complex as prewriting. It is essential that ASD students seek additional assistance in prewriting and writing. For ASD students, writing centers may be a solution to prewriting and writing issues. For prewriting, “priming” is a potential tool. Priming “ allows students to preview an assignment or activity with someone before it is presented” (Geither 80). Another solution is graphic organizers, which lay out the complex process of prewriting. Another issue for ASD students is perfectionism, as described below: ….for autistic students the process to the final product is often more complex. They are often perfectionists (Wolf et al, 2009) and thus may be hesitant to turn in the final product of an assignment (Geither 82). Writing center consultants should reduce authority with their experience of not knowing all of the answers as consultants. If consultants do not know every answer for revision, ASD students do not need to be perfectionists. Yet many ASD students still struggle with

4 revision due to “mindblindness”, which hinders their ability to think outside of their own perspective. Thus, consultants must use various methods to alleviate mindblindness. In Toby Fulwiler’s article “Provocative Revision,” Fulwiler explains four ways for consultants to help revise: limiting, adding, switching, and transforming. These four ways are stated in a practical and pragmatic matter, which makes these methods clear to ASD students. ASD students are intimidated by abstraction, so Fulwiler’s concrete explanations are valuable to them. Within these four modes of revision exist two applications of each mode. Narrowing time, space, and action is one move for limiting. Fulwiler explains this move below: I suggested, in other words, that Amanda start her next draft by limiting time, place, a​ nd ​action o​ f her potato field story; her next draft begins this way: “Potatoes, mud, potatoes, mud, potatoes, that was all I saw in front of me. They moved from my right side to my left, at hip level. A conveyor belt never stopping. On and on and on” (Fulwiler 160). Here, Fulwiler argues that limiting time, space, and action aids students in finding meaningful details in a drafted story. ASD students tend to focus on many details that may not matter, so they need to find details that they can focus upon. Once they find meaningful details, elaboration is necessary to make an interesting paper. Writing center consultants can show ASD clients how to elaborate through open-ended questions, such as “Where do you think you can elaborate more?” Scope and focus are another mode of

5 limiting. Fulwiler writes in the following quote that narrow focuses can reveal connections between two topics: When writers do not yet know a lot about a subject, they see it as if from a distance – and from a distance, even cities and mountains look small and manageable. Writers of such drafts then have the choice of staying far away, letting the generalities stand, and moving on to new subjects (and usually to mediocre papers) or moving in close, narrowing and sharpening the focus, and doing real writer’s work – which means exploring the geography up close (Fulwiler 161). Here, experimenting with different drafts is the catalyst for this mode of narrowing subjects. ASD students need to focus on a few details, and not twenty. Focusing on too many details overwhelms both student in terms of composition and instructor in terms of comprehension. Consultants need to be cautious to not fix every grammatical error when reading papers. For adding, adding dialogue “adds interest by limiting the focus to one or two perspectives in a particular scene” (Fulwiler 161). This places an ASD student outside of oneself because two perspectives are clearly displayed on a draft through the use of dialogue. Fulwiler also adds that “approximate re-creation is fair game for all experiential and autobiographical writing” and supplies an example from a student named Karen: “Girls, you have got to keep your heads in the game. Don’t let them get you down. You’ve worked so hard all season. You are just as good as them, just look at our record, 18-2-0” (Fulwiler 162).

6 This re-creation of the coach’s dialogue adds his perspective, which gives a sense of drama. Later, Karen adds an internal monologue that builds up the conflict between her and her coach: Yeah, think of every sweat-dripping, physically-grueling, suicidesprinting, drill-conditioning Saturday morning practice this year. (“OK girls, for every missed foul shot its one full suicide!”) Oh, yes, I remember those practice sessions just fine (Fulwiler 163). Overall, this dramatic tension between the coach’s desires and the team’s exhaustion is obvious. This adds creativity and excitement to a draft. ASD students are highly creative beings when they are not constrained. For example, if an ASD student is revising a personal narrative, he or she tends to describe the situation without any dialogue because high school may teach ASD students the five-paragraph essay without any room for experimentation. Because of this trend, many ASD students assume that they always must write in that format. Consultants should encourage ASD students to discard five-paragraph essays. Adding interviews is another mode. Interviews increase “credibility and readability at the same time (Fulwiler 162)” because both can contain statistical and personal authority. Statistical authority is evidence given from a professional source, whereas personal authority is evidence given from an anecdotal source. ASD students can learn to determine who is peer-reviewed and who is not, therefore, they can begin to see that their perspective is only anecdotal. Consultants can point out when evidence is

7 needed with an ASD student by reading aloud and asking for supports. Fulwiler also explains below why adding interviews is important: Adding the voices of real live local experts also holds true for other kinds of objective writing as well: When writers let other voices help them argue, report and evaluate, their arguments, reports, etc., are both more persuasive and exciting (Fulwiler 163). This relates to ASD students through the placement of other voices. This placement teaches why other perspectives manner through the added complexity of the paper. Consultants can teach this by encouraging ASD students to add more characters. For switching, changing point of view presents the following advantage: role-playing a third person. This is an advantage to ASD students because it trains them to look at the same ideas in different perspectives. In Fulwiler’s article, he gives an example of an announcer: Well folks, it looks as if Belmont has given up. Coach Gleason is sending in his subs. It has been a rough game for Belmont. They stayed in it during the first quarter, but Walpole has run away with it since then. Down by twenty with only six minutes left, Belmont’s first sub is now approaching the bench. Here, the multitude of ways that ideas can be presented is clear. From the announcer’s perspective, the tension between Karen and her coach is unseen. ASD students can learn to see how different perspectives give meaning to a paper by writing things outside of their own perspective. Tutors can encourage this by asking what another character may

8 think in a given situation. Switching voice is similar to switching point of view, but it directly changes how the information is presented, as well as how it is received. Changing voice encourages the reader to read on because it multiplies the modes of presentation of the same idea. For transforming, the genre becomes transformed. Changing research reports is one example of this in action: [The opening paragraph of the “Editor’s Note” which served as a preface to the script.] In this documentary we had a few problems with getting certain interviews and information. As the house is a refuge for parents in distress, our questions were often limited. We didn’t want to pry. Later, Fulwiler argues typical college research papers have no audience in mind, and supports writing within a hypothetical situation He feels that in the script format “the student writers felt they could be more candid about real problems they encountered,” and it displayed “how it limited their resulting script.” ASD students can benefit though the direct practice of changing genres, as shown above. Reforming narrative is another mode of transformation, and Fulwiler explains with a student named Avy, who was “trying to describe a long distance friendship over a four-year period,” so she “recreated periodic telephone conversations to show passage of time” (Fulwiler 163). Fulwiler describes the benefits of this mode. The mode can serve as an effective means exhibit multiple layers in a story. This mode can benefit ASD students by encouraging them to consider how perspectives in time, space, and action change a story. These

9 revision methods are not comprehensive for ASD students, but they encourage conversations between student and consultant that can cross neurological divisions. With the above discussion about revision mentioned, it is not possible to cure mindblindness in ASD students, but that does not necessarily mean it needs to be cured. In Ann Jurecic’s article “Mindblindness: Autism, Writing, and the Problem of Empathy,” Jurecic explores how neurological divides could connect or remain disjointed, and why. She argues that the definition of empathy across disciplines frames the answer below: As I will show, it is writing of this kind—writing that is shaped by reflection, along with a compassion formed by knowledge—that has the potential to transform ingrained structures of thought and to refigure how medical and educational institutions conceive of neurological difference (Jurecic 4). This quote directly addresses academic implications of empathy because Jurecic acknowledges that diagnostic models of difference - which are shaped by neurotypical health professionals - negate neurodiversity. Later, Jurecic expands on her answer by explaining why the current narrative for autistic children needs to be changed. She advocates for autistic minds to speak about their realities, and she also admits that her neurotypical abilities of empathy are limited when confronted with autistic minds: I can no more fully imagine the emotional, mental, and social lives of people with autism, especially how they understand human relationships,

10 than I can imagine a life without the spoken word. Here is where my practice of empathy confronts its limits. Finally, Jurecic addresses what could be done to bridge the neurological gap: Compassion and reason are thus not binary poles, but complementary functions as we seek to solve complex problems involving the relation of people to institutions such as the state, law, medicine, and education (Jurecic 15). Here, she suggests the potential solution: to redefine what compassion and reason mean from binary poles to a complex, intersectional, and post-structuralist sphere of forces. Jurecic gives a concrete application through Gregory, a child she worked with: Understanding an audience will never be an intuitive or easy task for him, so his writing and revising process must involve real readers—professors, teaching assistants, tutors, others—who can review his drafts to help him find the problems that he cannot see on his own. Working in this way, Gregory, who had seemed impossible to teach at the beginning of the semester, finished the term performing solidly in the middle of the class (Jurecic 20). Ultimately, Jurecic’s article concludes that the current collegiate system must allow itself to come to the ASD student, and only on the ASD student’s terms. In conclusion, there is help for ASD students in writing centers, but consultants must be careful to let the student be consulted on his or her own terms. Otherwise, consultants can overwhelm a student with feelings of perfectionism or overextending

11 capacities. Talking about the neurological makeup of ASD students illustrates their challenges and needs, as well as how to meet their needs. An academic world biased toward neurotypical individuals establishes conflicts that can never be comprehensively resolved, but such a world needs to witness the realities that ASD students face as a result of the world around them. Fulwiler’s recommendations encourage a productive conversation between student and consultant, but the student must have more power over a given assignment. Brown and Jurecic demonstrate that the neurological makeup of ASD students alters their reality; therefore, ASD students must advocate what works best for them in a neurotypical education system. ASD students will always have more struggles with audience and empathy, but recognizing the reflections of autistic realities can help bridge gaps that cannot be bridged with the current and detached narrative on ASD individuals.

12 Works Cited

Brown, Heather M., et al. "Exploring The Persuasive Writing Skills Of Students With High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder." ​Research In Autism Spectrum Disorders​ 8.11 (2014): 1482-1499. ​PsycINFO​. Web. 30 Apr. 2016. Brown, Heather M., and Perry D. Klein. "Writing, Asperger syndrome and theory of mind." ​Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders​ 41.11 (2011): 1464-1474. Fulwilwer, Toby. "Provocative Revision." ​Writing Center Journal​ 12.2 (1992): 190-204. ​MLA International Bibliography​. Web. 30 Apr. 2016. Jurecic, Ann. "Mindblindness: Autism, writing, and the problem of empathy."​Literature and medicine​ 25.1 (2006): 1-23. Meeks, Lisa, and Elise Geither. "Writing and the autism spectrum: helping students through the process." ​Good Autism Practice​ Oct. 2014: 79. ​Publisher Provided Full Text Searching File​. Web. 30 Apr. 2016.