II/RDI (WAS:Re: Re: How ABAists view biomed and complimentary medicine)

[Guest guest]

Hi Sara, wondering if II training would be of any use to someone with

limited English -- specifically with TA September conference workshop

in mind?

Friends of mine are thinking of attending, but since they won't be able

to understand much of day 2 (they would be relying on handouts, but even

so would miss loads) and are now thinking of coming mainly for day 1.

Actually their understanding of written language is ok but too fast when

spoken and much of it flies by... Would they be wasting their money or

would they still benefit from the 'non-verbal' part of instruction? How

fast-moving is the training?

Natasa

>

> > **

> >

> >

> > omg that is a difficult question!!!

> > They come from 2 different places so it's hard to compare them.

Firstly

> > there is a lot of overlap - they are both based on typical

development.

> > They would largely agree with one another I reckon.

> > but there are 4 main differences in my humble opinion:

> >

> > - I.I. is much more limited in what it tries to achieve (the

social/

> > communication/ play type learning of the first year of a typical

child and

> > a bit beyond) (many people would do it instinctively). RDI goes

further

> > - RDI is much more complex and has hundreds of objectives. II is

> > almost ridiculously simple to deliver. (In my limited experience

of Tom

> > only - and I AM NOT saying it would be the same for every child,

despite

> > the simplicity and lakc of objectives you go way faster and

achieve much

> > mroe through II)

> > - RDI is adult lead and II is mostly child lead.

> > - RDI is a complete home-package marketed at parents. II isn't.

It's

> > never really been aimed at families but I am currently involved

in changing

> > that!

> >

> > Happy to chat to anyone about it.01792 296017 You can just try it

out at

> > home to see if you like it, you don't need to do to much reading or

> > receive too much training to give it a go.

> > Sara x

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hello all

> Hi Sara, wondering if II training would be of any use to someone with

> limited English  -- specifically with TA September conference workshop

> in mind?

Anything approved by 'crystal mark' plain English campaign logo would

be suitable for non native speakers or even some autistics.

http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/crystal-mark.html

These are the standards they use and also you can find out who is a

member of crystal mark ie has the same strict standards.

Below is what they are looking for, my experience of dyslexia led me

to the crystal mark, im just an autistic student.

" Documents must be as clear as possible if they are to gain the

Crystal Mark. But as each document deals with a different subject for

different readers, it is impossible to set a precise standard.

We do not expect a document about a complicated topic to be as easy to

understand as one about a simple topic. But we do expect each document

to be as clear as possible for its intended readers.

Things we look for include:

the use of ‘everyday’ English;

consistent and correct use of punctuation and grammar;

an average sentence length of 15 to 20 words;

plenty of ‘active’ rather than ‘passive’ verbs;

explanations of technical terms;

good use of lists;

words like ‘we’ and ‘you’ instead of ‘the Society’ or ‘the applicant’;

clear, helpful headings, which stand out from the text; and

a good typesize and a clear typeface. "

--

is