Best way to develop oral skills?

[jillio]

I've gone to both oral programs and deaf school. I don't recall speech ever being intensive but then I was considered a success in speech class. When I went to the oral program, I had speech for like 15 mintues 3x a week. When I went to mainstream, it was reduced to 2 classes per week and it was also 15 mintues. Then as I got older (around 6th grade and still in mainstream), my speech classes were reduced to once per month then I stopped taking any speech class when I was 15.

When I attended VSDB, they had speech classes for all the grades. I'm certain that speech classes was more intensive for the lower grades than in the upper grades. No amount of speech is going to help some deaf speak. I remember oddball saying his mother tried to give him speech therapy 8 hours a day when he was 3. That wasn't successful. If he can't speak as an adult, no amount of speech is going to help much. Sounds have to be relatively undistorted for you to learn speech. My speech class got reduced to once a month mainly because my speech was considered good. The other kids had to take speech more often than I did.

Even at deaf school, deaf interact with hearing who barely know sign especially in the dorms. I remember reading about one former VSDB s(Virgina school for the deaf and the blind) student's complainant about hearing dorm supervisors who barely knew sign in a blog on deafread about the plot of two VSDB students' plot to murder some people at VSDB. She's right to complain about it. So deaf are hardly isolated from the hearing.

Thanks for sharing your experience. That is what people don't seem to realize. The difference in placement has very little to do with the amount of, or inensity of, speech therapy offered. The big difference is the language of instruction that allows the child to fully access the curriculum.

 

[Daredevel7]

That's strange. I could have sworn I made a post earlier. So basically, jillio and deafskeptic (and others), parents do not have to worry about whether to get extra speech therapy services when sending their child to a deaf/residential school? Seems like they are good enough for you?

 

[deafskeptic]

That's strange. I could have sworn I made a post earlier. So basically, jillio and deafskeptic (and others), parents do not have to worry about whether to get extra speech therapy services when sending their child to a deaf/residential school? Seems like they are good enough for you?

Education is more important than speech. If I had a deaf child, I'd certainly have them go to speech class but I also would make sure that what is taught is 100% accessiable to my child. If my deaf child is a success in speech class, great. If not, well it's not the end of world and education is the best tool you can give to your child.

 

[shel90]

education is more important than speech. If i had a deaf child, i'd certainly have them go to speech class but i also would make sure that what is taught is 100% accessiable to my child. If my deaf child is a success in speech class, great. If not, well it's not the end of world and education is the best tool you can give to your child.

amen!!!!!!

 

[jillio]

Education is more important than speech. If I had a deaf child, I'd certainly have them go to speech class but I also would make sure that what is taught is 100% accessiable to my child. If my deaf child is a success in speech class, great. If not, well it's not the end of world and education is the best tool you can give to your child.

Yeppers. We keep saying it over and over, and still the same questions keep getting asked. Its almost as if people think if they ask the same question in several different ways, sooner or later, they will be able to manipulate the answer they want, rather than having to accept the answer they are getting.

 

[Daredevel7]

Education is more important than speech. If I had a deaf child, I'd certainly have them go to speech class but I also would make sure that what is taught is 100% accessiable to my child. If my deaf child is a success in speech class, great. If not, well it's not the end of world and education is the best tool you can give to your child.

It's incredibly difficult to talk about oral skills here without getting some form of "Why do you want to sacrifice your child's education?". Dang! I have a little more respect for anyone who brings up speech.

Yes, education is number one. However, kids are not in school forever. Everyone's concern is the development of kids in schools. Honestly, it's kind of obvious that the majority of deaf kids need ASL and like Jillio said "Research backs it up.". My concern is the young adults after graduation.

People assume that if their development in education (socially and academically) is on par with their hearing peers, they should be perfectly fine as adults in the hearing world. (This is WITHOUT even looking at their oral skills at all). Is this a safe assumption?

 

[Hear Again]

Education is more important than speech. If I had a deaf child, I'd certainly have them go to speech class but I also would make sure that what is taught is 100% accessiable to my child. If my deaf child is a success in speech class, great. If not, well it's not the end of world and education is the best tool you can give to your child.

 

[jillio]

It's incredibly difficult to talk about oral skills here without getting some form of "Why do you want to sacrifice your child's education?". Dang! I have a little more respect for anyone who brings up speech.

Yes, education is number one. However, kids are not in school forever. Everyone's concern is the development of kids in schools. Honestly, it's kind of obvious that the majority of deaf kids need ASL and like Jillio said "Research backs it up.". My concern is the young adults after graduation.

People assume that if their development in education (socially and academically) is on par with their hearing peers, they should be perfectly fine as adults in the hearing world. (This is WITHOUT even looking at their oral skills at all). Is this a safe assumption?

Education without speech will get them much farther in life than speech without education. And, there are plenty of real life examples of that.

 

[Daredevel7]

Education without speech will get them much farther in life than speech without education. And, there are plenty of real life examples of that.

Education without speech is the exact same as education with speech?

 

[jillio]

Education without speech is the exact same as education with speech?

You are twisting words again to suit your agenda.:roll:

 

[jillio]

Do you like me?

No.

Well, if I was 2" taller, would you like me?

No.

Well, if I was 2" taller, had blonde hair and blue eyes, would you like me"

No.

Well, if I was 2" taller, had blonde hair, blue eyes, and $1000 in the bank,would you like me?

No.

Eventually, you need to stop asking the same question, and accept the answers you are given.

 

[AlleyCat]

Education without speech is the exact same as education with speech?

Speech isn't what makes education work while children are in school. Speech definitely helps in life-all-around, but doesn't make you smarter (or not, without speech.)

 

[rick48]

It's incredibly difficult to talk about oral skills here without getting some form of "Why do you want to sacrifice your child's education?". Dang! I have a little more respect for anyone who brings up speech.

Yes, education is number one. However, kids are not in school forever. Everyone's concern is the development of kids in schools. Honestly, it's kind of obvious that the majority of deaf kids need ASL and like Jillio said "Research backs it up.". My concern is the young adults after graduation.

People assume that if their development in education (socially and academically) is on par with their hearing peers, they should be perfectly fine as adults in the hearing world. (This is WITHOUT even looking at their oral skills at all). Is this a safe assumption?

Welcome to my world

That is because the common misconception portrayed by some is that a child who develops oral skills is somehow being deprived of an education unless that child is in a bibi program or has ASL as L1.

I cannot speak for deaf schools everywhere but where we live they were and still are academically inferior to our public and private schools. So the reality is that where we live, the student graduating from the deaf school is not par with not only his hearing peers but those deaf kids who were mainstreamed.

It is very difficult to generalize on this topic as each child is unique and has different needs.

Rick

 

[Daredevel7]

You are twisting words again to suit your agenda.:roll:

It was a genuine question.....?

Education is the most important, correct? Speech may or may not be helpful, which is why I asked "Education without speech is the exact same as education with speech?"

People really are ready to attack here!!! Whoaaaaa.

Kinda reminds me of me and my mom. She's been on my case about my weight for a decade, so I'm very on the edge about that. A mere mention of her saying "Oh, have you gone to the gym lately?" makes me go red. So I have to remember to take a step back because it really is a simple question.

 

[shel90]

Oh, all of the above!!! Many times.

Who said that growing up oral is easy? I never denied that I didn't go through what many oral kids do. Like I said, I am not promoting oralism. It definitely isn't for the many or perhaps even all. However, I also am wary of the repercussions of surrounding yourself in ASL most of the time in school. ASL is a wonderful language for the deaf, but it seems to me that once school's over, some of them get frustrated and it's too late to do anything since they are adults now.

A majority of the Deaf ASL users who grew up with ASL don't feel that way. Yes, there r a few who wished they had oral skills.

I promote the use of both with ASL as the language of instruction. Nothing less or nothing more.

 

[jillio]

Welcome to my world

That is because the common misconception portrayed by some is that a child who develops oral skills is somehow being deprived of an education unless that child is in a bibi program or has ASL as L1.

I cannot speak for deaf schools everywhere but where we live they were and still are academically inferior to our public and private schools. So the reality is that where we live, the student graduating from the deaf school is not par with not only his hearing peers but those deaf kids who were mainstreamed.

It is very difficult to generalize on this topic as each child is unique and has different needs.

Rick

Please provide statistics to support that claim.

 

[jillio]

It was a genuine question.....?

Education is the most important, correct? Speech may or may not be helpful, which is why I asked "Education without speech is the exact same as education with speech?"

People really are ready to attack here!!! Whoaaaaa.

Kinda reminds me of me and my mom. She's been on my case about my weight for a decade, so I'm very on the edge about that. A mere mention of her saying "Oh, have you gone to the gym lately?" makes me go red. So I have to remember to take a step back because it really is a simple question.

Apologies. I misunderstood your question.

Yes, education without speech, if you are referring to content, quality, and academics, is the same as eduction with speech. That is exactly why deaf children of deaf parents are competitive with, and often surpass, their hearing peers in academic achievement. Where the problems begin is when speech becomes so much a focus that early language acquisition is not possible. It is the linquistic difficulties that create the cognitive problems that must then be remediated.

 

[AlleyCat]

Actually, I have to agree with Rick on this one. I don't have statistics, nor am I a majority across the United States, but being as immersed in the deaf community here as I am in the St. Paul/Minneapolis area, there is a distinct difference between the level of education the students received at our state deaf school (at least of my age level, which is late 30's - I have heard it has improved since) and the level of education mainstreamed children receive.

 

[jillio]

Actually, I have to agree with Rick on this one. I don't have statistics, nor am I a majority across the United States, but being as immersed in the deaf community here as I am in the St. Paul/Minneapolis area, there is a distinct difference between the level of education the students received at our state deaf school (at least of my age level, which is late 30's - I have heard it has improved since) and the level of education mainstreamed children receive.

While I don't doubt that may be true, are we actually looking at the differences in standards and curriculum (e.g. quality of education) or are we looking at the problems created when children are left in language deprived environments until say, the age of 8 or 9, then sent to the deaf school because the mainstream no longer knows what to do, and the deaf school then becomes for attempting to remediate the problems created by the child's environment, and which, often, will never be fully overcome?

 

[AlleyCat]

While I don't doubt that may be true, are we actually looking at the differences in standards and curriculum (e.g. quality of education) or are we looking at the problems created when children are left in language deprived environments until say, the age of 8 or 9, then sent to the deaf school because the mainstream no longer knows what to do, and the deaf school then becomes for attempting to remediate the problems created by the child's environment, and which, often, will never be fully overcome?

I am certain that does happen, and probably quite frequently.