Page 2 of 3 [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


What do you think
Neither of you should teach, but SHE is worse than YOU 54%  54%  [ 13 ]
Neither of you should deach, but YOU are worse than HER 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
You should be allowed to teach; she shouldn't be 33%  33%  [ 8 ]
She should be allowed to teach; you shouldn't be 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
You should both teach, but still SHE is worse than YOU 4%  4%  [ 1 ]
You should both teach, but still YOU are worse than HER 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Total votes : 24

Roman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,301

30 Aug 2009, 3:49 pm

2ukenkerl wrote:
Still, for several reasons, I think you were brought up in india. RIGHT!?


NO! I am in India to do postdoc, and thats it. I started postdoc mid June, so I moved to India then.

I was brought up in Russia. I came FROM RUSSIA to USA when I was 14, back in 1994. I became Permanent Resident of USA in 1997, so I could work ever since that time. I was a TA in 2001. So I had green card and they verified it before letting me teach.

FYI, I also became USA citizen a year ago, but that has nothing to do with 2001 of course. But agian, I was permanent resident back then so yes I could teach.

As far as my upbringing, again I was brought up in RUSSIA, not India. I am in India ONLY to do postdoc.



2ukenkerl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,968

30 Aug 2009, 3:53 pm

Roman wrote:
2ukenkerl wrote:
Still, for several reasons, I think you were brought up in india. RIGHT!?


NO! I am in India to do postdoc, and thats it. I started postdoc mid June, so I moved to India then.

I was brought up in Russia. I came FROM RUSSIA to USA when I was 14, back in 1994. I became Permanent Resident of USA in 1997, so I could work ever since that time. I was a TA in 2001. So I had green card and they verified it before letting me teach.

FYI, I also became USA citizen a year ago, but that has nothing to do with 2001 of course. But agian, I was permanent resident back then so yes I could teach.

As far as my upbringing, again I was brought up in RUSSIA, not India. I am in India ONLY to do postdoc.


OK. at least russians, ironically, TEND to speak better English. It is simply a problem that I, and many others, have had, so I had to consider it.



Roman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,301

30 Aug 2009, 4:02 pm

2ukenkerl wrote:
ALSO, AS does NOT affect EVERYTHING that way! MAYBE voice attributes, but NOT everything. PLEASE don't even try to go there..


So wouldn't that suggest that I am on the MOST SEVERE end? I know you guys disagreed with Bryna and said I am in the middle rather than the mild. But if I have symptoms that you said most aspies don't, it means I am on SEVERE end rather than in the middle.



Apple_in_my_Eye
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2008
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,527
Location: in my brain

30 Aug 2009, 4:35 pm

Quote:
And also, how come that teacher who actually *DID* something wrong, has to only wait half a year suspension, while you have to suffer SEVERAL years, when you didn't even DO anything other than making a bad IMPRESSION. So subjective "impression" superceeds actions!


Probably because even if they think her mistake was horrible, they can understand it. It's "wrong, but understandable."

Your mistakes, though, they find alien, and it disconcerts them that they can't estimate the 'envelope' of other mistakes that you might make. Sort of like a lack of Theory of Mind in reverse. So they are worried that you might make other worse mistakes, because you seem unpredictable, in that way, to them.

Maybe others have mentioned it, but being the authority figure multiplies the severity of all the 'impressions' you make. If you're harsh (even accidentally) to a student it's 10 times worse than criticizing a colleague. And if you can make them comfortable they can love you for it. It's not just about "impressions" -- a teacher being harsh or cussing themsevles out could be flat-out scary or hurtful to people. (Note: the cussing oneself out thing -- IME people don't often get that. I stopped doing it years ago; for me, it wasn't communicating what I thought it was at first. Just IME, though.)


_________________
Aspie Quiz: 160/43
Alien Quiz: √2/pi


2ukenkerl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,968

30 Aug 2009, 4:41 pm

Roman wrote:
2ukenkerl wrote:
ALSO, AS does NOT affect EVERYTHING that way! MAYBE voice attributes, but NOT everything. PLEASE don't even try to go there..


So wouldn't that suggest that I am on the MOST SEVERE end? I know you guys disagreed with Bryna and said I am in the middle rather than the mild. But if I have symptoms that you said most aspies don't, it means I am on SEVERE end rather than in the middle.


I simply said AS affects certain things, NOT everything. SOME try to claim it makes one antisocial, etc.... so they can go postal! So NO, I didn't say you were middle. I don't know you well enough. Still, your attitude and hygeine don't sound great.

The US is SUPPOSED to be different from communist russia. There is SUPPOSED to be a higher standard here.



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,283
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

30 Aug 2009, 8:35 pm

personality 'disorders' are developed from how we learn to cope in life. We can be AS but still have personality disorders that cause us to make unfortunate choices in life.
We never think of them as unfortunate, we feel they are the only choices we can make, simply because we have learned to cope with them though out our lives.

all our problems are not always just AS is what I am saying.


_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,784

31 Aug 2009, 7:51 am

Roman, a lot of people with AS have to learn a new set of rules and just deal with the fact that this is how life is.

Your mom said you were mild. News flash....parents do a lot of stupid things to "protect" their kids. I doubt she lied to you because she wanted to hurt you. Parents can never know if their choice will ultimately help or hurt in the long run. My parents took me to a therapist when I had problems in school. The therapist (a total quack) told them the problem was that I was lazy and punishment would make me bring my grades up. My parents trusted his advice, and it made things worse. Yeah, I brought my grades up to get out of the situation, but nothing changed in the abusive environment I was subjected to at school (something the therapist couldn't learn because he never got me to trust him enough to open up about what was really going on), and my relationship with my parents got worse because now I felt I could NEVER tell them what was going on at school.

There is a reason why some Aspies can do what you can't do. AS is a autism spectrum disorder. What affects you may not affect me or the next person with AS. There's what...18 different distinct symptoms...any or all of which can be displayed with varying intensities. You focus on your strengths and work to adapt for your weaknesses.

Roman wrote:
So how come they let HIM teach but not me? So it is some extra thing such as I LOOK weird and he doesn't, and that is plain unfair.


Hate to say this....

LIFE ISN'T FAIR. GET OVER IT.

Not the nicest advice in the world, but it's the most pragmatic.

If you're NT and not "beautiful," you get treated a lot worse and get a lot less opportunity than someone that's "beautiful." Nothing someone with AS or NT can really do about that. You can just work to be the best YOU that you can be and see where that takes you.

Roman wrote:
But in case of Asperger a lot of it is self-fulfilling prophecy. For example, the reason people with Asperger "can not" socialize is that others judge them too fast and don't let them.....I didn't have problem with temper, my voice simply HAPPENED to be lowd. So if others were not JUDGING this as temper, but instead tried to understand that I am "different" then everything would have been fine.


That people judge from "first impressions" is the fundamental flaw of the NT universe. It hurts EVERY person who has AS. Now, that you are documented with AS, you could handle future teaching situations by openly disclosing and talking about AS and how it might affect your teaching style. This would go a long way to your students understanding why you are "strange." Your mannerisms looked like you were losing your temper. That you were simply talking loud is not relevant because it is what the students felt was going on that matters. Had the class known you were autistic and to not take things like lack of eye contact, odd behavior or sudden loud talking personally, it might have never been an issue.

If you get another shot at a teaching position, you may have no choice but to "cover your ass" by openly talking about AS on the very first class meeting so that the issue is addressed.

Roman wrote:
Statistically speaking, NT-s who happened to be jerks do better than aspies. That can be verified by a number of tihngs, from dating where "nice guys finish last" to jobs where ppl like that other teacher can keep a job since she is "part of a flock". Aspies, on the other hand, have to suffer since they are "outsiders".


Again....life isn't fair. Sorry. I know it sucks. Trust me. Been there, done that, have the t-shirt and souvineers.

Roman wrote:
I never said I couldn't help swearing. The only thing I was talking about was lowd voice. The swearing incident WAS my choice; but that was only ONE insident. On the other hand, the dozens incidents when my voice happened to be lowd was NOT my choice.


True, but we all get judged by the sum total of our actions and choices.

Roman wrote:
I want to be a researcher, not a teacher. On the other hand, of course, teaching usually "goes in the package" since professors in most schools are supposed to teach. There are ways around it, such as working in Research Institute. But that would cut down options quite a bit, since the competition for professorship is very high as it is, so I should be applying everywhere I see an opening, and not limit myself to FEW places where I don't have to teach.


I would like to better understand why this issue is holding you back economically. My only guess is that being a "researcher" pays X while being a "professor" teaches X+5 and you have to be able to teach to hold a job as a "professor" in most places. Hence, if you can't hold a teaching position, you'll likely never be more than a "researcher."

Roman wrote:
However, even if it didn't affect my career, I am upset AT THE PRINCIPLE that they won't let me teach, while they DID let that woman teach. That woman did something really malicious ON PURPOSE, while I didn't do anything on purpose. Yet she can teach and I can not. That pattern goes way beyond teaching: in general, jerks are accepted as "part of the flock" no matter how mean they are, while aspies are rejected for their differences, even though their differences are neutral.


You are comparing apples to oranges. The woman works for a different employer. She got her job, and a lot of places will keep you on the payroll once you are part of "the club." In your case, you could have been fired outright. Some people might have felt that you should have been terminated. You were not. Some might think you got the same treatment as this woman did.

The difference I see is that this woman is being given a second chance to make the same mistake. If she does something stupid like that again, she should be fired because it shows a pattern of incompetence/poor judgment.

You, however, have a legitimate disability. The law doesn't say your employer MUST tolerate your disability...only that your employer MUST make "reasonable accommodation" (a vague legal concept at best). This is why I strongly suggest you get with someone who specializes in helping people with disabilities work on their job skills. Once you get a better handle on the weaknesses that got you into trouble, you can confidently push for a second chance with the understanding that if someone has a problem with your methods or mannerisms, you need to know about the issue IMMEDIATELY so you can work on resolving the problem. Nobody can do this for you, and I doubt an employer will bend over backwards to make it happen. If you seem (in their eyes) to be content doing research in a lab and never stepping into a classroom, they will keep you there. However, they will not put you back into teaching so long as they reasonably expect that what happened last time will happen again.


Roman wrote:
I AM formally diagnosed, and they know it. But it seems like the fact that they know I am diagnosed is what stood in my way. They decided that since this is part of my Asperger, I can't fix it, so they shouldn't give me a chance to fix. And that was very unfair. For example, their assumption that my looking at blackboard and not at the class was due to problems with eye contact is plain wrong. I was simply too lazy to turn around and that is it; but they kept asking me if it is "painful" for me to look at student's eyes.


This is the inherent flaw of having been DX with AS (or any disability). Penn & Teller (entertainers) did a show on the ADA and showed how it actually INCREASED discrimination against the handicapped because now employers were afraid of what MIGHT happen if they hired (or didn't hire) someone with a disability, if that person didn't get a promotion they went for, or if that person was terminated from their job. Rather than take risk, employers found it easier to just not hire the handicapped at all.

I'd like to think "academic" environments would be more "tolerant" but since colleges are the last free standing caste systems in America, I'm not surprised that they are not. If you are blind, deaf, in a wheelchair, etc. (the "socially acceptable" disabilities, as I like to call them), you might go far. If you have AS, Tourette's, or any other disability that makes other people uncomfortable, I'd expect that they still get the "leper treatment" in hiring and advancement.

Again, you need to do things to "adapt" to what caused problems last time and then press for a second opportunity under the requirements of the ADA. Sadly, a lot of the responsibility is on your shoulders to make it happen.

Roman wrote:
Well, don't you think it is shallow that people talk about you behind your back....

And also, how come that teacher who actually *DID* something wrong, has to only wait half a year suspension, while you have to suffer SEVERAL years, when you didn't even DO anything other than making a bad IMPRESSION. So subjective "impression" superceeds actions!

And also think of this. Interview can have two outcomes: good or bad. So yours happened to be bad, so what? Why is it so amaizing that they have to go and tell the world about it? On the other hand, what that teacher did IS amaizing, but no one told the world about what SHE did.


Yes, it is shallow, and it's not fair, but...as I said....

LIFE ISN'T FAIR. GET OVER IT.

There are also OTHER factors in MY case.

1. The teacher you speak of HAS her job. I suppose there are protections to make firing very difficult. Keep in mind that if ANY teacher in ANY district is simply accused of having "indecent liberties" with a student, their career is over, even if it's proven to be a false accusation. The damage is done, and it tends to be permanent in 100% of cases.

2. The profession I was trying to get hired in was a very tight-knit community. So, word got around. Employers outside of this line of work NEVER heard about the incident. This tends to be true in any line of work with similar social cohesiveness.

3. For what it's worth, in hindsight, these jerks did me a favor. I saw the kind of guy they hired, and years later, I met one such person in a hardware store (he was chief of security). I wondered what happened and he told me how he caught a coworker sexually harassing a secretary where he worked. He reported the incident so it would be resolved quietly via internal process. THEY FIRED HIM. He sued, but nothing came of it. After that, the secretary field a sexual harassment lawsuit against the employer for what happened to her and the employer had to settle out of court because they couldn't win the case (guess who was going to testify on her behalf). If these people I wanted to work for would plunge a knife in the back they bent over backwards to hire over me, what kind of treatment would I have ever gotten working for them? Down the road, they kept me from getting employment elsewhere, and that sucked, but looking back, I can see that likely would never have been happy doing the work the career required. The part that upsets me to this day is not the denial of a "career" that I wanted, but rather the loss of economic opportunity...a paycheck. Often, I'm more upset with myself because I instinctively knew that I really didn't have a future in this career field, but I wanted it so bad that I ignored the evidence telling me it was a waste of time and energy to pursue. Rather than pursue something more available and more rewarding, I spend the better part of 10 years trying to get something I knew deep down was never going to happen. I can't blame that for that. It doesn't vindicate what they did to me, but it's not worth being angry about anymore.



Roman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,301

31 Aug 2009, 9:06 am

zer0netgain wrote:
Your mom said you were mild. News flash....parents do a lot of stupid things to "protect" their kids. I doubt she lied to you because she wanted to hurt you.


I know my mom is overprotective, so her intention was to protect and not hurt me. I guess I am just pissed at her for protecting me. It is hard to explain but when you have super-overprotective mother like me, you would understand.

zer0netgain wrote:
There is a reason why some Aspies can do what you can't do. AS is a autism spectrum disorder. What affects you may not affect me or the next person with AS. There's what...18 different distinct symptoms...any or all of which can be displayed with varying intensities.


In other words, I am one of the most severe cases, not in the middle.


zer0netgain wrote:
Hate to say this....

LIFE ISN'T FAIR. GET OVER IT.


Life consists of real individuals, not robots. So why can't these individuals choose to be fair?


zer0netgain wrote:
If you're NT and not "beautiful," you get treated a lot worse and get a lot less opportunity than someone that's "beautiful."


That is also something I have a lot of problem with. Why can't people realize that it is not someone's fault that they are not beautiful?

zer0netgain wrote:
That people judge from "first impressions" is the fundamental flaw of the NT universe.


And why do they? What do they have to lose by TESTING their assumptions? Do they not have spare minute to occasionally GLANCE at a person to "double check" their original judgement? Are they SOOO busy they don't have that much time?

zer0netgain wrote:
It hurts EVERY person who has AS. Now, that you are documented with AS, you could handle future teaching situations by openly disclosing and talking about AS and how it might affect your teaching style.


I WAS documented back then, as well, and I told all the staff about my Asperger BEFORE problems ever came up. But the fact that I told them about Asperger only hurt me, not helped me.

1) They kept insisting I register at a disability services. Now the purpose of disability services is to give someone extra time on tests. I don't need extra time on tests, I am typically doing tests FASTER than most. So why did they insist so hard I register? Well, if I did, there is NO WAY I can prove to anyone I never took extra time. And now, if I did take extra time, then according to NORMAL set of rules I cheated and should be kicked out of school -- after all, that is exactly what would happen if a normal student refused to give a test right away when time is called. But, of course, since I am on disability services, I stay in school. Now if you put the two together, I AM kicked out of "NT version of school" since I cheated according to THAT standard; but I stay in "disabled version of school". It is simply that "disabled" version and "NT version" happened to be in the same building.

Now, suppose a student walks out of the room with a test, and does NOT open their text book. They will still be kicked out for cheating. Why? Because they can't PROVE they didn't open their text book. Likewise, since I was on disability services, even though I NEVER TOOK EXTRA TIME, I can not PROVE that, so I am STILL kicked out of the "normal" verison of the school! Thus, I stay "disabled" and can NEVER come back to "normal" school.

May be THAT was their goal? They wanted everyone to know "he is disabled, who knows how many times he took extra time on tests", even though my disability doesn't affect my test performance. Their motivation was probably that NT-s want to put everything into a neat boxes, and a disabled should go on "disabled" box. They don't want to accept the fact that I am NOT disabled, just different and it is people's JUDGEMENT about my differences that trully disables me.

I mean, look at how weird it is. What is a purpose of regestering for disability services? In order to request accomodation. Did they ask me to request accomodation? No, they knew I don't need extra time, so no one ever told me to request it. But they STILL told me to go and register. So it is like saying "it is fine you don't have to order any food, but you absolutely HAVE to walk into a caffeteria". So why would they ever say it? Probably in order to tell all your friends that you ordered food, even if you didn't; that is the only conceivable purpose.

2) They totally misinterpretted different things I did due to their knowledge of Asperger. For example, they were ESPECIALLY pushy about my signing up for disability services after I overslept the midterm. I was telling them this has nothing to do with Asperger, and tey were telling me I don't know that because I am not an expert. But you don't have to be an expert: Asperger doesn't make me more sleepy than most people, so it is not Asperger related, but they couldn't follow that simple logic. Likewise, my looking at blackboard was also viewed as Asperger since aspies have trobule with eye contact; they couldn't get that if it was a humanity class where I don't have to WRITE on a blackboard I would totally look into students eyes and have no trouble with it; it is simply that I had to right that made it "mechanically" inconvenient to be turning around; nothing to do with difficulties looking into their eyes. Now the FACT that they viewed everything as part of Asperger is probably why they didn't give me another chance since they figured that due to disability I won't be able to fix it.

zer0netgain wrote:
I would like to better understand why this issue is holding you back economically. My only guess is that being a "researcher" pays X while being a "professor" teaches X+5 and you have to be able to teach to hold a job as a "professor" in most places. Hence, if you can't hold a teaching position, you'll likely never be more than a "researcher."


Okay let me spell it out

1) If I am a professor, then financially it doesn't matter whether I teach or just researcher. In both cases I have a lot of money.

2) There are VERY FEW places that have non-teaching researcher option. Now, due to very high competition (in Minnesota there was 300 people per opening at one point) in order to have a reasonable chance of getting SOMEWHERE I have to apply to A LOT of places. Since the places wiht a "non teaching researcher" option are very few, I can't afford to limit myself to only these; and furthermore, if I am to get anywhere, the simple proablitiy theory will imply that most likely that would be a place without non-teaching researcher option.

3) AS A GRADUATE STUDENT (which I am not any more) teaching has financial advantages in that it is more available than research assistentship. I could have been supported doing research. But in my particular circumstance, I was working with retired professor who didn't have a support, and collaborated with a professor at another school, who couldn't support me either because he was at another school. So IN MY CASE I would have been doing much better financially if they were to let me teach.

zer0netgain wrote:
You are comparing apples to oranges. The woman works for a different employer. She got her job, and a lot of places will keep you on the payroll once you are part of "the club."


Wouldn't that apply to teaching as well?

zer0netgain wrote:
In your case, you could have been fired outright. Some people might have felt that you should have been terminated. You were not.


Actually I kept comming to a chairman and asking him if I were going to be "expelled" long BEFORE the teaching complaints came out. The answer he kept giving me is that no one is expelled for bad teaching; the most that can happen is that one would lose support. People can only be expelled for academic reasons.

Nevertheless, in the NEW school (Michigan) they DID try to expell me for academic reasons (NOT teaching related), and that was because I was working in an area of physics where I had problems with AXIOMS, so I wanted to "rewrite" these axioms before I could proceed learning what I was supposed to learn. So all they saw was that I was making no progress.

Now the reason I got ph.d. is that they didn't expell me right away. Rather they gave me a deadline to find an advisor by June 1, 2006, which I did, thats why I stayed in Michigan. But still, no one wanted to be my advisor, so if it wasn't for that ONE person who agreed, I WOULD have been expelled. This brings on other questions:

a) Why are they so stupid that they wont understand when I tell them that I had problem with axioms, so if I were to switch fields where these AXIOMS are not used, I would do just fine

b) What do they have to lose by testing their assumptions and giving me a project in a different field, especially if I tell them that I don't ask for any financial support, I just want to stay in school. So if they don't pay me a penny, what would they lose if they end up being right and I won't make any progress

c) According to the policy of University of Michigan, you are expelled during the first semester of a THIRD year if you have no prospect. But the June 1 2006 deadline they gave me was the end of a SECOND year. So it is like saying "mr X is a very bad student, so in order to fail him I will give him a harder test". Now do you see how ridiculous it is? If he is REALLY bad student, you don't have to give him HARDER test in order to fail him.

d) The guy who wanted to expell me is THE SAME perosn whom I was asking for half a year whether I would be expelled or not, and he was assuring me that I won't be. Then, the last time I asked him whether I would be expelled he was like "yeah why not", so its like he simply "forgot" to say "no you won't be expelled" like he was supposed to. So if it was simple forgetfulness, why was he sooo persistent on expelling me, despite all of my efforts to change his mind back the next half a year?

e) In the new school, University of Michigan, I only screwed up with two professors. But NOBODY wanted to work with me ever since. This means there was A LOT of talking behind my back. Why are PROFESSORS so shallow? As they say "great minds and hearts talk about ideas and feelings, average minds and hearts talk about weather and events, small minds and hearts talk about other people and criticize them behind their back"

f) How come most of the professors who refused working with me were telling me they were busy instead of being honest and saying that it is because of all the horrible things they heard about me? At least if they are honest I have a chance to defend myself. And if they are SOOOO sure they are right, what are they afraid of?

g) Why are people being expelled based on research anyway, if it can't be objectively verified. There is OBJECTIVE way of expelling people: if your GPA is below B in graduate school you are expelled. My GPA was A-, so I should NOT be expelled, clear enough. ON THE OTHER HAND expellihng someone based on RESEARCH (NOT coursework) is extremely unfair since there is no OBJECTIVE way of judging someone's progress, as there is no transcript. So expelling people based on THAT is the exact concept aspies fall victim to, when they are judged based on SUBJECTIVE things.

zer0netgain wrote:
Some might think you got the same treatment as this woman did.


How can you say I got the same treatment as her, if she is allowed to teach and I am not?


zer0netgain wrote:
The difference I see is that this woman is being given a second chance to make the same mistake. If she does something stupid like that again, she should be fired because it shows a pattern of incompetence/poor judgment.

You, however, have a legitimate disability.


Are you saying that, because of my disability, I should not be given another chance to screw up because people know that I will? If that is what you mean, then don't you think it is called discrimination against disability?

zer0netgain wrote:

I'd like to think "academic" environments would be more "tolerant" but since colleges are the last free standing caste systems in America, I'm not surprised that they are not. If you are blind, deaf, in a wheelchair, etc. (the "socially acceptable" disabilities, as I like to call them), you might go far. If you have AS, Tourette's, or any other disability that makes other people uncomfortable, I'd expect that they still get the "leper treatment" in hiring and advancement.


Now, I don't remember if it was you or another poster, but someone brought an example on this thread about a person who is wheel chair bound not being allowed to do a job that requires walking. Now here is an irony: wheelchair IS socially acceptable! So in the real life the wheelchair analogy will be used NOT against wheelchair bound but against aspies even though the latter does NOT disable anyone which means that analogy is not valid!

zer0netgain wrote:

1. The teacher you speak of HAS her job. I suppose there are protections to make firing very difficult. Keep in mind that if ANY teacher in ANY district is simply accused of having "indecent liberties" with a student, their career is over, even if it's proven to be a false accusation. The damage is done, and it tends to be permanent in 100% of cases.


Wouldn't these protections apply to me as well?

zer0netgain wrote:
3. For what it's worth, in hindsight, these jerks did me a favor. I saw the kind of guy they hired, and years later, I met one such person in a hardware store (he was chief of security). I wondered what happened and he told me how he caught a coworker sexually harassing a secretary where he worked. He reported the incident so it would be resolved quietly via internal process. THEY FIRED HIM. He sued, but nothing came of it. After that, the secretary field a sexual harassment lawsuit against the employer for what happened to her and the employer had to settle out of court because they couldn't win the case (guess who was going to testify on her behalf). If these people I wanted to work for would plunge a knife in the back they bent over backwards to hire over me, what kind of treatment would I have ever gotten working for them? Down the road, they kept me from getting employment elsewhere, and that sucked, but looking back, I can see that likely would never have been happy doing the work the career required. The part that upsets me to this day is not the denial of a "career" that I wanted, but rather the loss of economic opportunity...a paycheck. Often, I'm more upset with myself because I instinctively knew that I really didn't have a future in this career field, but I wanted it so bad that I ignored the evidence telling me it was a waste of time and energy to pursue. Rather than pursue something more available and more rewarding, I spend the better part of 10 years trying to get something I knew deep down was never going to happen. I can't blame that for that. It doesn't vindicate what they did to me, but it's not worth being angry about anymore.


But shouldn't you still be pissed AT THE CONCEPT that it happened, even though you are lucky you didn't get the job.

Also, you might be lucky for not getting a job but you are NOT lucky that they spread rumors, and THAT is the most unfair part.



Katie_WPG
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Sep 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 509
Location: Winnipeg, MB, Canada

31 Aug 2009, 9:34 am

There are different things to consider here...

University students actually have something monetary to lose if they get stuck with an ineffective teacher. They want you to know your stuff, but they also want you to know HOW to teach it. That's why they are helping to pay your salary.

That is actually one of the largest complaints that students have about professors. That many of the professors are too interested in research to actually pay proper attention to teaching their classes effectively. There actually ARE plenty of professors that act in a similar way to how you acted; but they are tenured, which makes them harder to fire. They just get really low ratings on ratemyprofessors.com.

I would still say that the Kindergarten teacher did something much worse than what you did.

Because at the end of the day, Kindergarteners are much more vulnerable and impressionable than University students. They (should) also be more emotionally fragile, and an event occuring so young (authorized by the primary authority figure at that) could have long-term effects on their social and emotional development.

The teacher also showed that she doesn't have legitimate power over her classroom now that she has let them make an executive decision. What happens when a group of kids approach the teacher the next day saying "We want to vote out the fat girl, because she's ugly and stupid"? You have a group of children yelling until they get their way, and a girl crying in the corner because she doesn't understand what she did wrong.

A University student can attend the first few classes, decide they don't like the professor, and transfer to another section. A Kindergartener can't.



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 15,283
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

31 Aug 2009, 9:38 am

Roman, have you ever considered "they" are uncomfortable with that huge chip you have on your shoulder? Do you think that they see the chip and not you, or has your whole life been consumed by your insistance that the world see things the way you do?

at some point, don't you want peace?


_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon


Last edited by sinsboldly on 31 Aug 2009, 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

mgran
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 May 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,864

31 Aug 2009, 9:40 am

You are a bad teacher because you cannot communicate, she is a bad teacher because she's an immoral heartless b***h. She shouldn't be allowed to teach anyone. You might be able to teach one on one, but I'd certainly be reluctant to employ you as a teacher.

I'd say neither of you should teach, but she is worse than you.



zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,784

31 Aug 2009, 10:00 am

Roman wrote:
It is hard to explain but when you have super-overprotective mother like me, you would understand.


I do understand. I have found it easier to accept, forgive and move on with life. Dwelling for too long over something I can't change hasn't gained me anything in life. It took quite a few years for me to learn that lesson.

Roman wrote:
In other words, I am one of the most severe cases, not in the middle.


Maybe. Maybe not. You seem to be able to hold a job of some sort. You are able to compete a graduate education. You're probably more afflicted than I am, but nowhere near as bad as others. Since you can do what you can, there is hope that you can train yourself to better "adapt" to social requirements and lesson the negative impacts AS has introduced to your life.

Roman wrote:
Life consists of real individuals, not robots. So why can't these individuals choose to be fair?


Because the vast majority of people (both NT and AS) tend to not appreciate what it is like to be in the "unfavored" group of society until they go through it themselves. I find it ironic that people with AS are criticized for not having empathy for others when it's so abundant in NT society on many levels.

Roman wrote:
And why do they? What do they have to lose by TESTING their assumptions? Do they not have spare minute to occasionally GLANCE at a person to "double check" their original judgement? Are they SOOO busy they don't have that much time?


That's about it. People simply are too lazy to invest the time and energy needed to know people before passing judgments. So, they trust first impressions. To be fair, in most cases, first impressions tend to be accurate...otherwise people wouldn't trust them so widely. However, just because first impressions are correct in MOST cases doesn't mean they are accurate in ALL cases.

Roman wrote:
I WAS documented back then, as well, and I told all the staff about my Asperger BEFORE problems ever came up. But the fact that I told them about Asperger only hurt me, not helped me.


This is the double-edged sword of the ADA. You did your part. It sounds like they just did not want to do their part. Your disability was not "socially acceptable" so they would just as soon not be bothered. I suppose you're lucky they just didn't outrightly kick you out of school.

As I said, academia is the last of the standing caste systems in America. They preach tolerance, equality, opportunity, but in practice they do the exact opposite. This is the sad reality of the way the world is.

Roman wrote:
How can you say I got the same treatment as her, if she is allowed to teach and I am not?


Because she was hired in a formal teaching position that likely invoked certain rights that protected her employment in all but the worst situations.

If I understood you correctly, your issue happened when you were a graduate student. You likely had no real rights or protections of your "position" under those circumstances.

Think of it in terms of being in a probational status versus being past probation. Most probational employees can be terminated for any reason or no reason at all. Once you past probation, it's not uncommon for there to be rules and procedures for terminating someone from employment.

All the stuff you say about what happened at university appears to indicate that they had little interest in seeing you succeed as a person, and they were doing only what they had to do to comply with the letter of the law under the ADA. This is not surprising. For NTs (and my experience) the only students who got any real help or support in college/grad school are those who are parroting the ideology of the professors. If you disagree with the professor's world view or ideology on a topic, he won't fail you, but he won't recommend you for anything either. Lots of way to step on someone's head without breaking any rules or laws....even though you'd think such "educated" people would know better and act better.

This is why I look down on higher education and those who extol the virtue of it. I've found that most "educated" people are exceptionally elitist and look down on anyone not just like them. So much for being "enlightened."

Roman wrote:
Are you saying that, because of my disability, I should not be given another chance to screw up because people know that I will? If that is what you mean, then don't you think it is called discrimination against disability?


No. As I stated above, she did something stupid, and her job was likely protected in such a way that she's not being fired outright. If she screws up again like this, it might cost her her career.

In your case, the ADA says one must only make "reasonable accommodation." You are expected to perform the "bona fide occupational qualifications" of the job (BFOQ). THIS IS A MASSIVE GRAY AREA IN THE LAW.

A man in a wheelchair who wants a job is not unable to meet the BFOQ of a job if he works in most any office environment. If he is asking to work a construction job, it may be a barrier he can't deal with. In that case, he can't perform the BFOQ's and he can be denied opportunity without it violating the ADA.

You have a disability, what YOU must establish (because nobody is going to do it for you) is that YOU can perform the BFOQ's of a teaching position. You had a chance and did poorly. As a result, the school can justly say that your disability prevents you from meeting the BFOQs, and as such, you cannot be in a teaching position.

However, in your case, much of your "failure" could be the lack of "adaptation skills" which you CAN learn and then meet or exceed the BFOQs of the job you seek. However, nobody must give you a second chance...you have to fight for it.

This is the tragedy of not knowing you have a disability, or knowing you have one but not getting the help you need to best overcome the barriers you struggle with. Most anything in life will give you a chance, but if you blow it, that's it....game over. After that, you have to work to make yourself fit for a challenge then push to get a second chance to prove yourself.

It's not fair, but it is how life is.

Roman wrote:
But shouldn't you still be pissed AT THE CONCEPT that it happened, even though you are lucky you didn't get the job.

Also, you might be lucky for not getting a job but you are NOT lucky that they spread rumors, and THAT is the most unfair part.


You are 100% correct. I am angry at what happened. Even if I justify SOME of their conduct because of how I acted (which was not blameless), I don't think anyone can fully defend how they treated me or how low they stooped to do me wrong.

However, if I dwell on this, I'm disempowering myself and empowering them, and I get hurt yet again.

I repeat my mantra....Life isn't fair. Get over it.

I then look at what is right in my life, dismiss these people for being jerks, and I purpose myself to improve what was wrong on my part (examining my past conduct) as I focus on finding new opportunities.

To dwell over anger, pity, remorse, etc. only focuses my life energy on something rooted in the past which cannot change. If I'm to have anything of worth in life, I need to focus my life energy on something positive for tomorrow.

You need to do likewise. You know where things went wrong. You can work to correct them as much as possible. You have a DX (more than I have), and if you get yourself to a place where you should be able to handle a teaching job again, you should be able to push (under the ADA) for a second chance. All is not lost.

You even have the benefit of realizing that the academic community is not really making an effort to understand or accommodate your disability, so you know not to trust them or expect much help from them. It may not sound like a "benefit" but at least you won't make the mistake of trusting people who have already proven that you should trust them only after they prove themselves trustworthy...limits the chance of being betrayed in the future.



dadsgotas
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 94

31 Aug 2009, 1:58 pm

Roman wrote:
I AM formally diagnosed, and they know it. But it seems like the fact that they know I am diagnosed is what stood in my way. They decided that since this is part of my Asperger, I can't fix it, so they shouldn't give me a chance to fix. And that was very unfair. For example, their assumption that my looking at blackboard and not at the class was due to problems with eye contact is plain wrong. I was simply too lazy to turn around and that is it; but they kept asking me if it is "painful" for me to look at student's eyes.


For God's sake, if you were simply too lazy to do your job properly, why should you get a second chance?

The question is rhetorical. It doesn't look as though you're going to be reasonable about this, or accept any responsibility. This thread is a waste of time.

I hope ordinary people don't hear this kind of thing, and think we're all like this.



Woodpecker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,702
Location: Europe

31 Aug 2009, 3:54 pm

Well, I would like to point out that some people with AS can teach. Not all NTs can teach, just some of them can do it ! So just becuase a person is NT does not mean that they can teach.

I am thought to be a non-NT with AS, I can think of some other members here at WP who do have teaching duties and I can think of some university teachers who appear to have some signs of having AS.

While there are some things which would be close to impossible, such as getting a non verbal aspie to deliver lectures I think it is possible for some aspies to teach. If you are to do it then you may need to learn how to interact with the NT students.

For instance when a small group arrives for teaching, it is a good idea to ask them what they have been doing recently in their other subjects. I once asked that question and I discovered that one member of the group had been in a criminal court. Not to answer charges but to watch for the day, he told me about some lurid case of a man attacking another man with an axe. I told my group that "I am glad that I have not meet that man on a dark night" and then after thus breaking the ice with my group I then started to teach them.

You may feel shy and nervous, but you will be need to overcome your emotions and get on with the job. I am not going to give out advice on how the shy aspie can turn into someone straight out of the "animal house" nor do I think that it would be a good or possible thing for them to try. But you will need to do things which you do not normally do, some aspects of teaching is being like a actor in a feature film or a play. Rather than "friday the 13th part n", it might be "calculas II this time it is personal!" but unless you are superlucky you will have to behave in a different way to get the students to learn what they need to learn.

What is needed is for you to work out a way for a series of learning outcomes to occur without doing or saying anything which is offensive. If you can not do that (I do not care if you have AS or not) then you can not teach.


_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity :alien: I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man !


anxiety25
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Aug 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 820

31 Aug 2009, 4:46 pm

Severity really doesn't matter here and is an argument of opinion really, because everything manifests itself so differently from one person to the next. One person could argue forever that they are more severe than the next, and in the end, it really isn't the issue... it's a matter of whether or not that person is willing to work on it and do anything about it if it is holding them back.

I KNOW, for instance, that I would make a HORRIBLE teacher. I talk too loud-too many people think I am yelling when I am not, no matter how much I try to control my voice at times. I get frustrated too easily... if I know something, I expect others to as well, and get annoyed when I have to explain it time and time again. But the difference is, I realize it and accept it. I could work on it, but in all honesty, I just don't WANT to be a teacher. If I really wanted to, I would work on it as much as I could to learn to be a good teacher.

They say actions speak louder than words... I'm sure they are not listening much to you if you are trying to justify why you acted as you did and all non-stop. WHAT you did, ultimately, impacts how students are going to learn, and from thereon after, how those people are going to view you when it comes to teaching.

We can very much be the same way. You are hellbent on the idea that they discriminated against you, whilst they are based on what they saw thinking that you just aren't the best idea when considering someone for teaching.

It's not discriminating... if an NT did the same things, they would be sent out as well, because it isn't in the students' best interest ultimately. They weren't able to learn anything, felt uncomfortable, and probably on edge if they were worried about the loudness of your voice all of the time.

I know personally, in that environment, I would be a NERVOUS WRECK! I have a hard enough time with teachers who are decent explaining things to me and managing to maintain their composure-staying calm, soft voice, one on one work if need be, etc.


_________________
Sorry about the incredibly long post...

"I enjoyed the meetings, too. It was like having friends." -Luna Lovegood