California - education options for UHL?

I think they allow for a period of assessment with those clauses requiring that a student is able to learn and/or use ASL as primary communication method at school.

We've not yet seen a child come into the kindergarten classes "cold" with no ASL exposure at my daughter's bi-bi school, but that's probably because there are typically several ways to jumpstart exposure earlier around here. Many of my daughter's peers at school have been involved with the school for years prior to kindergarten, first through parent infant ASL programs until the age of 3, and then in the 2 year full-time preK program. There's also a strong Family Sign program in place in the state, and the Deaf & HOH program at one of the area's most prominent hospitals is staunchly pro-bi-bi ed, and encourages ASL for all, regardless of whether or not HAs or CIs are in use. And, in our area, many are deaf of deaf.

By the time kindergarten starts, the school has had a chance to assess whether or not children can use ASL as their primary means of communicating, and those who can't or don't are referred elsewhere. I've seen that happen in the case of a 6YO who was from an ASL-using household, and yet slowly moved from being age-advanced in ASL to ignoring ASL, refusing to use it and attending only to spoken language: a problem in a school in which nearly half the staff is d/Deaf and ASL is the primary means of instruction/interaction. One other child, from an activist Deaf family, began on the same trajectory, but they were able to successfully shift his development over the past year by moving away from HAs altogether and into an intensive ASL program. The family thinks one big issue may have been the impact of a lot of television with the sound on in the home.

If a child comes in "cold" to Kindergarten or the upper grades -- with little or no exposure to ASL -- I think they would allow for a year's trial to see if he progressed. But, maybe the OP would be able to include this little 4YO in a preK year or two for immersion purposes, and then he could start kindergarten on par with his peers as a 5 or even a 6YO, and wouldn't have to worry about sending the little one in cold.
 
CSign said:
Ain't that the truth. :thumb:
Click to expand...

How nice to know that you are finally accepting responsibility for your part in these discussions gone off track. I take it we can see a change in your posting habits as a result.

But this thread is not about you. Back to educational concerns.
 
CSign said:
They may have used speech expressively, but I can guarantee you that person used ASL receptively.

They wouldn't place a student in the CSD if they didn't use/benefit from ASL.
Click to expand...

How is it that you are so certain of so many things that you have virtually no knowledge of nor experience in?

How can someone coming from an oral environment be using ASL receptively? They have to have ASL as a regular part of their daily exposure for that to occur. Therefore, they arrived at school as oralist, but did not leave as such. You are making less sense with each post.

Use and benefit are two separate concepts. Again, you are misunderstanding the entire nature of statements, and starting arguments as a result of your misunderstanding.
 
CSign said:
I did, sweetie.

Which further supports my statement that a student would not be placed there if they would not use/benefit from ASL.
Click to expand...

Nice backpedal. You basically stated that they couldn't go. Now you're stating otherwise.

But thanks for seeing that through.
 
Wirelessly posted (sent from a smartphone. )

CSign said:
shel90 said:
I can ask my friend who is a teacher at CSDF on what is their policy with children who have UHL.
Click to expand...

In order to attend one of the California Schools for the Deaf, one of the requirements is that the student use ASL as their primary mode of communication, and that they would not benefit from programs available in their area. There are other eligibility requirements, but given that this student doesn't use ASL as his primary mode of communication he wouldn't meet the eligibility requirements.
Click to expand...

Not true. Qhen I entered csdf, I was signing in SEE. I learned to use ASL after that. The policy for using asl is stupid.
 
sequoias said:
Wirelessly posted (sent from a smartphone. )



Not true. Qhen I entered csdf, I was signing in SEE. I learned to use ASL after that. The policy for using asl is stupid.
Click to expand...

I clarified my statement with a quote from the eligibility requirements,

"The deaf applicant demonstrates the ability to learn/ and or use American Sign Language as the primary mode of communication to access instruction, including as follows..."

However, they must still be willing to utilize ASL as their primary mode of instruction and communication.
 
posts from hell said:
Nice backpedal. You basically stated that they couldn't go. Now you're stating otherwise.

But thanks for seeing that through.
Click to expand...

Yep. Didn't all this start over a statement that a student would not be accepted to CSD if they were not already using ASL as their primary mode of communication? I believe it was around post#8.
 
CSign said:
I clarified my statement with a quote from the eligibility requirements,

"The deaf applicant demonstrates the ability to learn/ and or use American Sign Language as the primary mode of communication to access instruction, including as follows..."

However, they must still be willing to utilize ASL as their primary mode of instruction and communication.
Click to expand...

Too little, too late. You already backed yourself into that proverbial corner. The best thing you can do now is back out gracefully.

And this is why we correct misinformation being presented as fact.
 
CSign said:
I clarified my statement with a quote from the eligibility requirements,

"The deaf applicant demonstrates the ability to learn/ and or use American Sign Language as the primary mode of communication to access instruction, including as follows..."

However, they must still be willing to utilize ASL as their primary mode of instruction and communication.
Click to expand...

do not confuse yourself with "clarification" and "correction". What you just did is correcting your previous post... not clarified because both posts are completely different.

perhaps it's best if you let somebody more qualified to talk about it. you're making a lot of mistakes on anything about deaf subject. tsk tsk tsk....
 
jillio said:
Yep. Didn't all this start over a statement that a student would not be accepted to CSD if they were not already using ASL as their primary mode of communication? I believe it was around post#8.
Click to expand...

No. I did not say that.
 
CSign said:
No. I did not say that.
Click to expand...

You'd better go back and check some of your own posts. I did, just to be certain that was what you had said.:cool2:

You specifically stated that as the student in question was not using ASL as their primary mode of communication they would not be accepted into CSD. Post #8.

Oh, well; at least we are now sure that the OP has gotten the correct information.

As this thread, at this point, is threatening to turn into another, "yes I did, no I didn't, all about me" rant, I am now bowing out. Misinformation has been corrected sufficiently.
 
Back
Top