Childs behavior

[deafdyke]

I think she is fluent in both ASL and English right now -- although I suspect we'll see some delays in both when we next test her (she doesn't get another bout of standardized testing in this area until next year, so the measures I can use are a little rough).

I don't think she's aware of what that means or my expectations. She's a high performer in school, and she is around a lot of children (both hearing and deaf). But our emphasis on language development is always organic (no drilling and we don't do AVT)

That is AWESOME!!!!!!! And even audilogically hoh kids can have delays. Li-Li is PROOF you don't need to exclusively focus on spoken English and that you don't need to do hyperintense speech therapy!
Is her written English decent so far? That can be a worry....Many dhh kids (including oral kids) have trouble expressing themselves in written English. BUT, written English issues do tend to be very common overall.

Both her current bi-bi school and her local school district feel that she could effectively be mainstreamed in September -- she'll be 5, she'll be entering kindergarten. We are currently choosing not to do this, because I think her high-level of performance and strong language development (both languages) is to a large part due to the very specific environment she is in. And, I don't think that we could maintain her ASL development if she moved to the local public school -- we need her to have peers, teachers, staff signing to her and around her, we don't have a social immersion in Deaf culture at home (community, church, a network of friends) and the expertise in ASL as way Faire Jour does, my daughter's school is the key to culture and language.

That's EXCELLENT news! I would definitly continue with the Deaf School placement as her primary educational placement for a few more years. Then gradually introduce mainstreaming as an option. See which placement she likes better. I really do believe that special ed placement needs to be very child centered. Mainstreaming CAN be good....but it can also be not exactly the best placement in the world. Especially socially ...and I mean complicated with the fact that your town is a small town it may not be able to offer the caliber of services that a dhh program or school could .....Also as things get harder/things change in higher grades you may need to switch schools.
It's kind of too bad you guys don't live closer to an area that serves as a "magnet" for the dhh students in the area. One of my friends sent her daughter to Kansas School for the Deaf for preschool and kindergarten. Her daughter is 11 now, and attends a magnet program for dhh kids.

 

[faire_jour]

It feels like we are on 2 different pages here. I'll be back in a minute.

Okay, I'm back.

I had no way of knowing how to say "horse" without being trained to do so. How to make the sound come out, and correctly. Otherwise I'd be saying "mfjgk" like I said in my earlier post.

Once I got past learning how to pronounce my constanants and vowels, and how to form words, then from there I could form SPOKEN words and sentences with the vocabulary, grammar, syntax, everything I'd learned about English. Learning how to articulate those words HAD to take place for me first. That is what my oral skills are.
FJ, you said "I don't think that many people focus on articulation instead of language. If so, it is a crime." -- it is not "instead". It is FIRST, and THEN. Learn oral skills to articulate, and THEN learn language. I worked with a speech therapist, sign teacher, and TOD all at the same time. To speak, to learn English, and to learn ASL.

I suspect the confusion lies in that Miss Kat has access to speech and learning to articulate comes far more naturally for her, just as it would have for most other hearing children, than those with HAs. I am a child of the 70's before CIs existed. So I had to develop what many of us call "oral skills" to articulate FIRST.

I completely disagree with the bolded part. Language comes first, then articulation. You show a child a ball and say "ball" and they coo back "bah" and you say "Yes! A ball". That is about teaching language not "oral skills" or articulation.

 

[AlleyCat]

I completely disagree with the bolded part. Language comes first, then articulation. You show a child a ball and say "ball" and they coo back "bah" and you say "Yes! A ball". That is about teaching language not "oral skills" or articulation.

Well. You weren't there when I was learning to speak.

I see that you don't grasp how hard we had to work at developing our oral skills. Without CIs, we didn't have access to speech. It was different for us back then. Open your eyes and realize that there was a different process for many of us, hence why so many of us speak of "oral skills".

You are at an entirely different place with Miss Kat and Grendel with her little girl, with both of your daughters having CIs. They both have access to speech which puts them in an entirely different situation than those of us with HAs that had to learn articulation.

That's why we're so defensive about our oral skills, and really, nothing you say will change that. It was hard work when we were kids.

I'm done with this subject. This is starting to get personal. Your "I completely disagree with the .... and so on ..." feels vindictive when you weren't there when I was 2 and learning how to articulate my words. You correcting us on how we learned speech is nothing more than your own form of the forum bullying you hate.

 

[shel90]

well. You weren't there when i was learning to speak.

I see that you don't grasp how hard we had to work at developing our oral skills. Without cis, we didn't have access to speech. It was different for us back then. Open your eyes and realize that there was a different process for many of us, hence why so many of us speak of "oral skills".

You are at an entirely different place with miss kat and grendel with her little girl, with both of your daughters having cis. They both have access to speech which puts them in an entirely different situation than those of us with has that had to learn articulation.

That's why we're so defensive about our oral skills, and really, nothing you say will change that. It was hard work when we were kids.

I'm done with this subject. This is starting to get personal. Your "i completely disagree with the .... And so on ..." feels vindictive when you weren't there when i was 2 and learning how to articulate my words. You correcting us on how we learned speech is nothing more than your own form of the forum bullying you hate.

+1

 

[faire_jour]

Well. You weren't there when I was learning to speak.

I see that you don't grasp how hard we had to work at developing our oral skills. Without CIs, we didn't have access to speech. It was different for us back then. Open your eyes and realize that there was a different process for many of us, hence why so many of us speak of "oral skills".

You are at an entirely different place with Miss Kat and Grendel with her little girl, with both of your daughters having CIs. They both have access to speech which puts them in an entirely different situation than those of us with HAs that had to learn articulation.

That's why we're so defensive about our oral skills, and really, nothing you say will change that. It was hard work when we were kids.

I'm done with this subject. This is starting to get personal. Your "I completely disagree with the .... and so on ..." feels vindictive when you weren't there when I was 2 and learning how to articulate my words. You correcting us on how we learned speech is nothing more than your own form of the forum bullying you hate.

But we are talking about today. I have not ever said anything about your experiences. We are talking about spoken English, specifically. I understand that your experience was different, so please don't label what Grendel and I are describing as "oral skills".

I do not feel like I have said anything negative about you, or your experiences.

 

[deafgal001]

I completely disagree with the bolded part. Language comes first, then articulation. You show a child a ball and say "ball" and they coo back "bah" and you say "Yes! A ball". That is about teaching language not "oral skills" or articulation.

yes, But usually they start correcting their speech later. They did the same to me... I didn't have speech therapy in my early years that I remember. I just remember my preschool years (public school but they work with different special needs children AND children who don't have special needs)... Everyday, she would make me sit on the table with her, and she would show me pictures and objects and I would repeat back to her. She did not try to correct me or anything. We would sing songs and everything. It definitely not AVT or anything, but I think it is very similar to it as they made me wear FM system and just listen.

 

[shel90]

But we are talking about today. I have not ever said anything about your experiences. We are talking about spoken English, specifically. I understand that your experience was different, so please don't label what Grendel and I are describing as "oral skills".

I do not feel like I have said anything negative about you, or your experiences.

Isnt the ability to speak in whatever language as having oral skills? To me, they are the same...the ability to speak the language.

I have good oral skills because I can speak English like a native user.

 

[faire_jour]

Isnt the ability to speak in whatever language as having oral skills? To me, they are the same...the ability to speak the language.

I have good oral skills because I can speak English like a native user.

Why can't you just call it language? Yes, you use your mouth, so it is oral, but it is so much more than just that. Language is about thoughts, not just the physical act of speaking, just like ASL is more than just moving your hands.

 

[AlleyCat]

Isnt the ability to speak in whatever language as having oral skills? To me, they are the same...the ability to speak the language.

I have good oral skills because I can speak English like a native user.

I agree. The ability. I think those who didn't have to work at it don't get it.

 

[AlleyCat]

But we are talking about today. I have not ever said anything about your experiences. We are talking about spoken English, specifically. I understand that your experience was different, so please don't label what Grendel and I are describing as "oral skills".

I do not feel like I have said anything negative about you, or your experiences.

You may not have said anything negative to me directly, but you are insulting us, as a group, when you discount our oral skills as what we perceive them to be. We had to work hard at this. This is an entirely different scenario than what you have with Miss Kat, hence why you don't understand how we see a difference.

 

[faire_jour]

You may not have said anything negative to me directly, but you are insulting us, as a group, when you discount our oral skills as what we perceive them to be. We had to work hard at this. This is an entirely different scenario than what you have with Miss Kat, hence why you don't understand how we see a difference.

But we are discussing today, and today's kids and today's experiences. I never said that what you have are not "oral skills", I said that today, especially with CI's (and bilingualism), we are discussing spoken English and language, not just the ability to articulate.

Again, I am not saying there is anything wrong with having "oral skills", I am simply saying that what Grendel and I are discussing and what all hearing parents that I know want is fluent language.

 

[Bottesini]

But we are discussing today, and today's kids and today's experiences. I never said that what you have are not "oral skills", I said that today, especially with CI's (and bilingualism), we are discussing spoken English and language, not just the ability to articulate.

Again, I am not saying there is anything wrong with having "oral skills", I am simply saying that what Grendel and I are discussing and what all hearing parents that I know want is fluent language.

Sure, but why have so much discussion of it here on a deaf forum with a whole bunch of us who are not 7 years old and do have good oral skills from the old days when we worked.

According to you if you think honestly, you are saying you have a hearing child except whens the processors are off.

It is not the same thing .

 

[deafskeptic]

well. You weren't there when i was learning to speak.

I see that you don't grasp how hard we had to work at developing our oral skills. Without cis, we didn't have access to speech. It was different for us back then. Open your eyes and realize that there was a different process for many of us, hence why so many of us speak of "oral skills".

You are at an entirely different place with miss kat and grendel with her little girl, with both of your daughters having cis. They both have access to speech which puts them in an entirely different situation than those of us with has that had to learn articulation.

That's why we're so defensive about our oral skills, and really, nothing you say will change that. It was hard work when we were kids.

I'm done with this subject. This is starting to get personal. Your "i completely disagree with the .... And so on ..." feels vindictive when you weren't there when i was 2 and learning how to articulate my words. You correcting us on how we learned speech is nothing more than your own form of the forum bullying you hate.

+2

 

[faire_jour]

Sure, but why have so much discussion of it here on a deaf forum with a whole bunch of us who are not 7 years old and do have good oral skills from the old days when we worked.

According to you if you think honestly, you are saying you have a hearing child except whens the processors are off.

It is not the same thing .

I don't think she is hearing, there are plenty of things she doesn't hear, but yes, she hears speech very well.

I think we discuss lots of different things here, and right now we are discussing the difference between "oral skills" and spoken language.

 

[AlleyCat]

But we are discussing today, and today's kids and today's experiences. I never said that what you have are not "oral skills", I said that today, especially with CI's (and bilingualism), we are discussing spoken English and language, not just the ability to articulate.

Again, I am not saying there is anything wrong with having "oral skills", I am simply saying that what Grendel and I are discussing and what all hearing parents that I know want is fluent language.

I don't think she is hearing, there are plenty of things she doesn't hear, but yes, she hears speech very well.

I think we discuss lots of different things here, and right now we are discussing the difference between "oral skills" and spoken language.

We can make it simple. You can say Miss Kat is learning spoken language.

We can say we have oral skills.

You are on a forum where many of us are of the same age group and can identify with what oral skills mean to us.

If you are so concerned about making sure it is "spoken language" then you would be better off at a forum that discusses 7 year old children with CIs.

 

[faire_jour]

We can make it simple. You can say Miss Kat is learning spoken language.

We can say we have oral skills.

You are on a forum where many of us are of the same age group and can identify with what oral skills mean to us.

If you are so concerned about making sure it is "spoken language" then you would be better off at a forum that discusses 7 year old children with CIs.

What started the entire discussion about "oral skills" vs spoken language was that a poster said that "hearing parents put too much emphasis on oral skills", we were responding to that. We were talking about parent's goals and the language of the children. I really don't know how it got turned into being about your experience, I mean no disrespect to your experience, but it wasn't what we were talking about.

And actually, Grendel did ask that Shel use "spoken language" or "spoken English" or just English, just Shel disagreed.

 

[deafgal001]

But we are discussing today, and today's kids and today's experiences. I never said that what you have are not "oral skills", I said that today, especially with CI's (and bilingualism), we are discussing spoken English and language, not just the ability to articulate.

Again, I am not saying there is anything wrong with having "oral skills", I am simply saying that what Grendel and I are discussing and what all hearing parents that I know want is fluent language.

The ability to articulate through therapy doesn't really apply to deaf people (maybe to a certain degree). It really apply to people with speech disorder. Not many deaf have speech disorder. They just not pronouncing certain sounds/phonics because they can't hear it until a SLP show them. SLP also make sure deaf people don't forget how to pronounce these sounds (make sure they have a good speech habit)

 

[AlleyCat]

What started the entire discussion about "oral skills" vs spoken language was that a poster said that "hearing parents put too much emphasis on oral skills", we were responding to that. We were talking about parent's goals and the language of the children. I really don't know how it got turned into being about your experience, I mean no disrespect to your experience, but it wasn't what we were talking about.

It didn't need to get turned into my experience, and it didn't. I was only sharing what I perceive oral skills to be (and what I think the majority of deaf in my age group perceive). However, you disagree with what we think oral skills are, or what emphasis is placed on that. Bottom line is that most posters feel that too much is said about speaking ability rather than ability to communicate and learn with (such as with ASL). Too much semantics are placed on terminology when I think we all ultimately have the same goal - to give each child the most means possible.

 

[faire_jour]

It didn't need to get turned into my experience, and it didn't. I was only sharing what I perceive oral skills to be (and what I think the majority of deaf in my age group perceive). However, you disagree with what we think oral skills are, or what emphasis is placed on that. Bottom line is that most posters feel that too much is said about speaking ability rather than ability to communicate and learn with (such as with ASL). Too much semantics are placed on terminology when I think we all ultimately have the same goal - to give each child the most means possible.

I don't disagree with what oral skills are, I disagreed that deaf children are today being taught to speak the way you described. I think that is where the misunderstanding lies.

 

[AlleyCat]

The ability to articulate through therapy doesn't really apply to deaf people (maybe to a certain degree). It really apply to people with speech disorder. Not many deaf have speech disorder. They just not pronouncing certain sounds/phonics because they can't hear it until a SLP show them. SLP also make sure deaf people don't forget how to pronounce these sounds (make sure they have a good speech habit)

What?

We did need speech therapy in order to learn to articulate. It does apply to deaf people. I don't have a speech disorder other than that I'm profoundly deaf.

Once I learned how to pronounce sounds, I remember it. In 30+ years, I haven't forgotten.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your post.