JanOMalleycat's comments (member since Apr 02, 2009)

JanOMalleycat's comments from the Book Nook Cafe group.

Deborah said: " I did, although i was tickled to see how Shirrin changed her design after Tim's comments. I liked the way she made the thread the "star" of the dress.

I thought stitching on the fabric was an ingenious idea to change the dress from looking wedding-y to something different. Without any fabric to work with, I couldn't imagine what she'd come up with.

Notice I'm saying "she'd" because I cannot tell Irina and Shirin apart. Did one of them go home this week? I'm having trouble remembering details even as y'all are discussing the episodes.

I do agree that I liked Epperson's design esthetic and he had a strong recognizable style which impressed me more than Logan. At this moment I can't remember a single outfit that Logan has put out there.

(Although Epperson's final dress WAS awful. Completely awful. But so many of them were awful in that challenge.)

Here's something I've been wondering about: In TV Guide they said that Mood had opened an entire LA branch in order to service the show. How could this be cost effective? At first I wondered if they'd wanted to trial balloon a West Coast outlet and this seemed a good chance, but still. Do you suppose it's fully staffed and there are customers besides the contestants? How would they get a good location both to service the show and the public?

Jan O'Cat

Kim said: "I am on Team Kevin. The judges love him but he seems to lack confidence at times. "

Deborah said: "i have the same impression of Kevin. He seems to be a marvel in the kitchen but has an aura of modesty which borders on no-confidence. Ruse?"

I agree with both of you and I don't think it's a ruse. Last week (or was it this week?) even as he was winning, his brow was furrowed and he seemed worried. I think he has issues! He's mentioned something about a "fat kid" complex.

Too bad because he seems a genuinely nice person in a season full of high-maintenance chefs and he seems to rise to every challenge. He's definitely my favorite front runner, followed by Jennifer.

I like the two brothers better than most of you do, if for no other reason than because I enjoy watching their rivalry play out. I also like Eli and won't be unhappy to see any of these people in the finals.

I thought the hostility to Robin came out of left field too. Unfortunately it does seem to be, as she's said, the young vs. the "old." There's also some definite food snobbery going on. I take it she's a caterer instead of a chef. Anyone know? I do believe that she's a little sanctimonious with the healthy food, yoga, and cancer-survivor comments, but it's hard to know if that's her or the edit.

I'm interested to see that they don't seem to keep the chefs as locked down as they used to. They've shown several making phone calls home. Maybe it's because of the high quality of contestants they're getting now--the producers can veer away from some of the reality show conventions like total isolation. Remember the season when there was a woman whose father was dying of cancer and she had to break the rules to phone her family?

Jan O'Cat

Kate said: "Oh no, I'm not able to contemplate fish tacos either. I just think it sounds wrong. "

There's nothing wrong with fish in any form or format.

--an anonymous cat

Deborah alluded: "I don't even watch "Top Chef" "sequel" about Master Chefs or whatever li'l hook it is that has grabbed the attention of stalwart board companions and cats. :-) "

This is a mistake that will surely be rectified if Top Chef Masters gets another season. I do believe I saw more delicious food in that series than I ever have anywhere else.

Don't make me come down there to commandeer your TV, Deb.

Jan O'Cat

Alias wrote: "10. Amelia’s mother fought to have her daughter placed in a special education classroom while Cara has been fighting since Adam was young to have him integrated into a normal classroom, with the help of an aide. How do you think their respective learning environments affected Adam and Amelia? In what ways might it have had an impact on the burgeoning friendship between the two children before Amelia died?
-------------------
This is a interesting question. Maybe some of the teachers here can address it. I can see valid points on all sides of this issue. It's too bad Jan is so busy, as this is her field. I don't know if there are any studies that have been done. If anyone knows and can link to any, that would be great. "

I'm here today, catching up with all the posts. It's been so long since I read Eye Contact that I don't remember many details, particularly not of the resolution of the mystery. I agree with all of your comments about the merits and demerits of the book. McGovern did well with what she knew--the inside world of a mother and her child and autism. The mystery was a mess. Because I'm a frequent mystery reader, I had a higher tolerance for the many red herrings than many of you did. However, the Grand Central woods (that at the beginning no child could possibly ever enter because teachers are watching) was an annoying misstep.

I will say also that McGovern, as a Special Education mom, has probably entered that world so thoroughly that she no longer realizes that IEP is a term not everyone would recognize. For those of us on this side of the fence, it's the all-encompassing balloon in which we operate.

Now, as to your specific question, Alias. . .cheesh, it's complicated. As was well-depicted in the book, special-needs covers a lot of ground from relatively unscathed by disability to completely "involved" (the word we use that means, as nearly as I can define it, having life-effects in all areas due to disability). The kids are all very different individuals. That's not a homily, it's the mind-boggling fact.

So, placement decisions should all be made based on the individual child, but so much plays into it. Regular education teachers work more or less well with kids with disabilities so a child's time in regular class will be affected by the teacher's ability. Special education teachers (including me, I'll go into it more below) have preferences and beliefs that affect their placement decisions. Parents have beliefs and anxieties about their child's experiences and possibilities in both regular and special classes. Administrators have an agenda and that includes the all-important TEST SCORES which affect placement decisions in two ways: if a special ed child is potentially too disruptive in regular class, the learning of the class as a whole may have a negative impact from inclusion. On the other hand, most Special Ed kids themselves have to take the tests and, for the most part, they do better if they've been included in a lot of regular ed throughout their school careers. Yes, there are studies. Plenty of them.

Add to that the individual characteristics of the children and you can see the conundrum. From here on I'll confine myself to talking about children with autism to at least narrow the field of discussion. What if you have a child who is academically capable, but so sensitive to noise (and that is a common characteristic) that any noisy or "busy" environment is painful for him? The common wisdom is to put him on a program where he's gradually expected to get more used to noise and learn ways to cope with it. Which may go well for a couple of years and then the kid runs into one of those teachers who's going to be less sensitive to his sensitivity. So there may be regression. Just as in the book, sometimes when there has to be a pull-back due to regression, it's hard to get on the path again. Oh my, it's complicated.

By the way, and not just because I know Kate is reading this, for the most part I don't fault teachers for issues like this. EVERYONE from child to adult, has individual strengths and weaknesses that they bring to the classroom. I'm fortunate to have a principal who works closely with me to match up kids with a teacher who can best meet their needs. But that's one philosophy of placement that could be countered with a lot of arguments including most particularly that some teachers end up with the most difficult kids year after year because they're good with them. It's not fair.

The district in which I work has a strong philosophy to include children with disabilities in regular education to the maximum extent possible. For about the last five years we've done a lot of co-teaching, in which the special education teacher goes into the regular classroom to assist the regular teacher with ALL kids who are having problems, not just the special education students.

The first problem with this is that it's very labor intensive. In our building that was one teacher co-teaching with about 25 regular teachers in 7 hours of school a day. (Yes, there would be at least one special education student in every class). Is that possible? No. Sheerly as a labor practice, it's much more efficient to "pull out" special education students for intensive small group instruction in Special Education class.

Then you have the problem of special education teachers like me. I agree with the observation that most special education kids learn best in regular education classes most of the time. But, it will surprise none of you to learn that I have very strong opinions about teaching methods and behavior management methods. I'm mostly unwilling to subsume my teaching style to another teacher which I would have to do to co-teach. I also went into teaching because I enjoy kids and want to develop close, daily relationships with them, which I believe wouldn't be possible if I were a co-teacher. So for the years that we've been moving toward co-teaching, I've been resisting.

So I take the kids who have the biggest problems with learning and/or behavior. I have my own classroom and they come to me for varying numbers of minutes or hours each day. That's why my job has gotten markedly more difficult in recent years and you are seeing less and less of me. I've made a deal with the devil to take the neediest kids in order to keep my own classroom.

Let me note that ALL of my students, even the most disabled, spend the majority of their day in regular education. I'm fortunate that the vast majority of teachers in my building are tolerant and accepting of kids with special needs. Historically my district and particularly my building have promoted inclusion.

I often have students move in from other districts where they have spent the majority of their day in Special Education class. These are usually kids with bad behavior problems. Bad academic problems can usually be dealt with in other ways than big chunks of time in Special Ed.

Almost without exception, if I take the leap of faith and put these kids in regular class for most of the day, their behavior and social skills improve almost immediately. It's obvious: they don't want to be embarrassed in front of their peers so they won't act out and they can only really learn the social norms of their age group by being with their regular peers (though it often takes some one-on-one coaching to get them to recognize what they need to change).

I've had to develop an incredibly trusting relationship with the other teachers to get them to allow me to do this. They know I will protect them and their class from my kid's misbehavior. They know they can talk to me frankly about what they're seeing. They know that if it's not working, I'll change the placement rather than cling to a philosophy that's not effective in this case. But most of the time inclusion yields great successes.

But, academically, behaviorally, and in "best interests of the child" (like with the over-stimulation problems) sometimes inclusion isn't a panacea. So in an ideal world it's always a decision based on the specific needs of that child.

Now let me go on to a couple of other observations I have about the school world in Eye Contact.

First of all, written from a parent's point of view, it's remarkably casual about the idea of "inclusion with a personal assistant." Personal assistants cost A LOT of money and are never a first recourse although it's the first recommendation of most medical personnel who diagnose autism and of most autism advocacy groups.

Let me tell you that I've been working with assistants for almost twenty years now and aside from the cost, it's just not that easy to find good ones. My gosh, the stories I could tell. It's also a poorly paid job, so there's a lot of turnover. Changes of assistant for kids with autism is often so difficult that it strikes me as better to never have a personal assistant to begin with.

Also, just as in the book, everyone including the kid comes to rely on the assistant, so when the assistant is absent, things go kerflooey. Kids' over-dependence on constant oversight is my biggest argument against personal assistants when parents or others ask for them. I always ask, "If we give them an assistant now, in elementary school, when and where are we going to make the decision to move away from the assistant? Middle school? High school? Because they're unlikely to have a personal assistant when they get out of school."

Second, boy could I identify with that teacher who never found a peer playmate for the little girl. Special ed teachers' days are incredibly busy and there are so many things I never get to, even if I know I should. The guilt is constant.

Also, think about it. Matching a special needs kid with a non-disabled peer is not that easy. Yeah, you can have a teacher choose the nicest kid in her class to be the peer helper, but that means that nicest kid will be tied to the special kid through every recess, PE, or whatever the situation. Is it fair to ask that of the kid? Yes, sometimes these arrangements work out beautifully and everyone benefits. But it's not that easy to set up. I don't know if McGovern, as a parent, knew the difficulties, but she sure got it right, even if by accident. It would be something a teacher would procrastinate about and then feel guilty about, especially as the little girl (what was her name?) would have benefitted. And not run off to the woods to be murdered.

Okay, much more than you wanted to know, as usual. I just thought I'd make my re-entry to the board as recognizable as possible, and wordiness seems to identify me.

Jan O'Cat

Donna said: "Poor Ashley Hamilton. He looks good in a suit, but has no grace and charm. Must be awful to have to live in George's shadow............ "

I had the same thought, Donna. Ashley looked downright Frankensteinish, clumping around.

Jan O'Cat

"however repellent I would probably find Maks in person, I sure do love to watch him dance!"

Quoting myself here to start this season's DWTS conversation. I still love to see Maks dance and I'm thrilled to see Alec. . .Mazoff? back. The first season winner with the swivelly hips. Love him.

I don't like Derek Hough's personality--too attention seeking. Nor do I particularly love his dancing. He doesn't have Maks' and Alec's grace and beautiful lines. BUT I have to admit that Derek has a genius for bringing out the best in his stars.

I was surprised by Kelli(?) Osborne's transformation, prettiness, and the seriousness with which she took up the challenge. Then I was surprised to be touched by her parents' reaction to her dances. I thought it was a lovely moment.

I'm also interested in the Iron Chef Kung-Fu master. He was energetic and graceful. No one else has stood out for me much yet. I'm surprised by the contestants having to learn two dances right off the bat, and difficult dances like the salsa and waltz.

And OMG, Maizie Grace. I only knew her from Kathy Griffin making fun of her. Contrary to the judges, I found her neither charming nor worth watching. I sure hope she doesn't have much of a fan base.

So far I'd have to say there are more I'd like to see go than stay.

Jan O'Cat

Donnajo wrote: "I watched my tape of it today and it was Connelly and Steve Cannell. Last season they had Patterson and Cannell and some other author I can't remember who it was. I think it's neat they put them on"

DJ, it's such a lightweight show that I wonder why the authors agree to do it. Everyone wants their fifteen minutes, I guess. It's a cute idea that Castle, the author, would have a regular poker game with other mystery writers.

Jan O'Cat

Hey, cool. Michael Connelly on Castle!

Jan O'Cat

madrano wrote: "LaTrica, i am SO glad to read that someone else felt that way about Althea's outfit. It looked sloppy in some way & it ranked as one of my least favorite. So imagine my surprise when it got raves. ..."

Yeah, me too. It looked like the model might not have been wearing a bra, but perhaps that was the fit of the blouse. Anyway, just last week Heidi came down on non-bra wearing, so I too was surprised at the raves.

On the other hand, I liked the 50's prom dress, so I obviously know nothing.

Jan O'Cat

When I'm just standing I tend to do it with arms akimbo. That's how I'm comfortable. Body language experts call it an aggressive stance--taking up more than my fair share of space in the world (which I already do by being a LARGE woman!).

So, sometimes when I'm standing with arms akimbo, I'll deliberately change my posture, but I then usually put my hands in my pockets--trying to hide my true feelings is the interpretation for that.

So I'm probably better off just owning my aggression. :-)


Jan O'Alexanderianesque

Alias posted: "9am (ET)
Approx. 3 hr. 1 min.
In Depth: Jonathan Kozol "

Shoot, I missed it again. It's usually just too busy around here for me to watch TV on the weekend.

Jan O'Cat

Nancy said: "Natalie is playing solitaire and won't talk. Kevin and Jordan are talking. What a sore loser."

Even worse to me is what a sore winner she's been all season. I hate her over-celebrating when things go her way, jumping around, grinning, shouting, boasting about doing it "with honor" or whatever. She did it when she won HOH, when Jeff left the house, when Kevin won POV. She's got an ugly personality. No wonder they all believed she's 18. She's childish.

Jan O'Cat

Deborah cranked: "Packaging. Am i really that old already? "

Oh please. Do I even need to mention the sealed plastic things that small electronics, batteries, some kitchen gadgets, and more and more things come in? Impossible to open, even with scissors because you can't get purchase against the slick, hard plastic. And when you do get it started, you cut yourself.

Jan O'Cat, grumbling

JoAnn/QuAppelle wrote: "I read that Karina Smirnoff and Maksim Chmerkovskiy broke their engagement. Just thought I would throw that out there! LOL"

And Donna added: " I heard! One of them was supposedly too high maintenance. Wonder which one?!?"

LOL, that's gotta be both of them! I thought it was probably a fake from the beginning, but however repellent I would probably find Maks in person, I sure do love to watch him dance!

Jan O'Cat

In addition to Jennifer, Kevin is one of my favorites for finalist so I was charmed to see how pleased he was to get to dine with all the famous chefs tonight. He flushed with pleasure when Tom announced the "prize" and then positively beamed at the table.

And he did it with bacon jam. How I would love to try that! JoAnn, if they post this recipe on Bravotv.com, you've got to make it and report in. What I like about Kevin is that he seems a master of flavor.

The two brothers also seem very skilled though I still haven't positively sorted them out as to cooking styles nor personality.

It's always so hard to predict finalists on this show when they judge plate by plate. A single week's failure can mean the elimination of a good chef.

Ashley seems lackluster yet manages to linger on. The knife of elimination is bound to get to her soon. There's also another woman who says virtually nary a word. I meant to remember her partner tonight to identify her, but I've already forgotten.

So sad that the French contestant didn't do so well in the French cooking competition. I wonder if it was because he was paired with Ashley. I don't remember any obvious contention but we don't see everything, especially not when there are so many still in the race.

I felt sorry for Jessie, eliminated in the Quickfire. She couldn't seem to hit her stride and I'm sure she felt her reputation was on the line. I wonder if that's true or if the publicity alone carries them over any possible damage.

Jan O'Cat

JoAnn/QuAppelle wrote: "Yes, Jan, Jennifer was the one "in charge" at the Nellis AFB meal."

She does have good skills, is composed, and a good, if tough, leader.

Jan O'Cat

Donna said: "Another thing that drives me crazy are those subscription cards they stick in magazines that fall out"

Oh now these would almost count as a favorite thing for me because whenever and wherever they fall out one or the other of my cats has to instantly lie down on it, claiming ownership of the all-important subscription card. It doesn't matter how many bazillion times it's happened in their lives, they've never gotten over the feeling that those things are valuable and they must grab it while they can.

Jan O'Cat

Nancy (Hrdcovers) wrote: "I never saw anyone so disinterested in seeing someone."

Kim said: "The poor guy seemed so sincerce and she was so flippant about it."

I certainly thought Natalie and her boyfriend have a strange relationship. She's so socially awkward that she's a near match for Michele. I've been especially struck all season at how oddly Natalie's eye contact goes when she's talking to other people or when she's talking to the camera in the diary room.

I thought it was telling and sad that Michele said that as a child she was bullied. I've been wondering all season what she'd done to inspire such hostile reactions from the other houseguests. I thought part of it, especially with Russell, was her mealy-mouthing around. But especially considering how everyone lies and evades on Big Brother, that hardly seemed like enough to invoke the vitriol that's been heaped on Michele.

Sadly it now occurs to me that she may be one of those people who, in ways so subtle they're invisible, somehow evokes rejection from others. I don't mean to blame her in any way, but working with kids it's been my observation that there some who are practically natural born victims.

I do hope that people in the jury house treat her well.

I'm left now hoping that Kevin will win. Natalie clearly doesn't deserve it and I can't stand her. Jordan is sweet but she's hardly played any game. Of the three left, Kevin is my only choice. I only wish that either of the women had won the veto.

Jan O'Cat

Is Jennifer the one who. . .hmmmm, I can't think of how to identify her. Longish blondish hair. She was the leader when they cooked for the troops--the organizer of things.

I think it's she you're talking about because she's the one I've picked for a finalist as well!

Jan O'Cat