Cochlear decison

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

not at all. We are using a fun experience (reading a book) to work on a skill set. No repeation, no drills, just a trained therapist, a book and some paper and scissors.

It's a drill in the sense that it's a repetitious activity that is performed until the child gets it "right" or until the therapist is satisfied, at which point they move on to the next activity.

But regardless, it's all speech therapy, and it's very real necessity for children with cochlear implants.

no, she listens to the story and cuts out an animal and glues it to a paper. The therapist is saying a key phrase that my daughter is matching to her pictures and coloring it the color she hears.

 

[jillio]

It's a drill in the sense that it's a repetitious activity that is performed until the child gets it "right" or until the therapist is satisfied, at which point they move on to the next activity.

But regardless, it's all speech therapy, and it's very real necessity for children with cochlear implants.

I'm wondering...is it a necessity for the child with the CI, or is it necessary to fulfill the inflated expectations and demands of the parent of the child with the CI?

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



no, she listens to the story and cuts out an animal and glues it to a paper. The therapist is saying a key phrase that my daughter is matching to her pictures and coloring it the color she hears.

And it is still DIRECTIVE. It is still THERAPY. What part of that don't you understand?

 

[jillio]

It's interesting how people keep saying, "better spoken language and speech", yet they don't say "better spoken and written language". Big difference right there. I have met a good number of people who were extensively trained to speak via oral therapy. However, it was pretty obvious that they weren't extensively trained to write.

**nodding** Or just better "language". Using spoken language better is not an indication of apppropriate and proficient use of language. It merely shows that they can mimic and repeat.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Which research is that?

So, the goal is speech. The goal is articulation. The goal is mimicry.

It's interesting how people keep saying, "better spoken language and speech", yet they don't say "better spoken and written language". Big difference right there. I have met a good number of people who were extensively trained to speak via oral therapy. However, it was pretty obvious that they weren't extensively trained to write.

sorry, but there is also research going all the way back to the 80's that say oral kids read better than tc kids. (geers & moog 1989)

again, i haven't seen anything comparing bi-bi and oral though

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



sorry, but there is also research going all the way back to the 80's that say oral kids read better than tc kids. (geers & moog 1989)

again, i haven't seen anything comparing bi-bi and oral though

There is research going back to the 1800's all the way into 2011 that shows that research to be in error.

 

[Jiro]

no, she listens to the story and cuts out an animal and glues it to a paper. The therapist is saying a key phrase that my daughter is matching to her pictures and coloring it the color she hears.

that's cute.

I'm wondering if she can replicate that similar auditory success in real world.

 

[Banjo]

sorry, but there is also research going all the way back to the 80's that say oral kids read better than tc kids. (geers & moog 1989)

again, i haven't seen anything comparing bi-bi and oral though

Then care to explain why I have met a lot of functionally illiterates who were raised via oral therapy? Not to mention that you said that your daughter is speaking in "broken English". Your argument defeats itself.

 

[Mountain Man]

no, she listens to the story and cuts out an animal and glues it to a paper. The therapist is saying a key phrase that my daughter is matching to her pictures and coloring it the color she hears.

Yet it's still a repetitious activity with specific goals (even if those goals are unknown to the child). Unless you're trying to say that your therapist just plays arbitrary games with your daughter and hopes she gets something out of it?

But never mind the actual activities, the point is your daughter is receiving language therapy, and this is typical for children with cochlear implants. Again, I'm not sure why you and Rick and others are trying so hard to downplay this truth.

 

[Frisky Feline]

I didnt read in the end but i will. i feel like HAs and CIs are the same thing by taking a speech therapy forever. same thing.

 

[Jiro]

Yet it's still a repetitious activity with specific goals (even if those goals are unknown to the child). Unless you're trying to say that your therapist just plays arbitrary games with your daughter and hopes she gets something out of it?

But never mind the actual activities, the point is your daughter is receiving language therapy, and this is typical for children with cochlear implants. Again, I'm not sure why you and Rick and others are trying so hard to downplay this truth.

I got similar therapy for years when I was little.

20 some odd years later.... my boss knocked on my door and told me that I needed to do this this this that. I smiled - "please email it to me"

he lol'ed and said - "oh right..."

 

[jillio]

Yet it's still a repetitious activity with specific goals (even if those goals are unknown to the child). Unless you're trying to say that your therapist just plays arbitrary games with your daughter and hopes she gets something out of it?

But never mind the actual activities, the point is your daughter is receiving language therapy, and this is typical for children with cochlear implants. Again, I'm not sure why you and Rick and others are trying so hard to downplay this truth.

It is I do play therapy with children who have been diagnosed with certain mental disorders. It is still therapy. It is still an activity with specific goals in mindstill intended to remediate. It is therapy. It is a therapeutic relationship with the child. The same can be applied here. And when the parent continues said therapy at home, they have entered into a therapuetic relationship with their child. This is not a natural parent/child interaction.

 

[AlleyCat]

Erk. This thread went in a crazy direction.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

sorry, but there is also research going all the way back to the 80's that say oral kids read better than tc kids. (geers & moog 1989)

again, i haven't seen anything comparing bi-bi and oral though

Then care to explain why I have met a lot of functionally illiterates who were raised via oral therapy? Not to mention that you said that your daughter is speaking in "broken English". Your argument defeats itself.

i said that my daughter spoke with inappropriate grammar when she was first learning spoken English, yes. And that would have been back when she was still a new implant user and in an ASL environment. So, no that wouldn't be the result of a spoken language program.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



i said that my daughter spoken with inappropriate grammar when she was first learning spoken English, yes. And that would have been back when she was still a new implant user and in an ASL environment. So, no that wouldn't be the result of a spoken language program.

So, honestly, she now has appropriate grammar usage as compared to a hearing child of the same age, and is producing spontaneous and appropriate spoken language without any direction at all? Remember, I said "honestly".

 

[AlleyCat]

Wirelessly posted

i said that my daughter spoken with inappropriate grammar when she was first learning spoken English, yes. And that would have been back when she was still a new implant user and in an ASL environment. So, no that wouldn't be the result of a spoken language program.

"My daughter spoken with ..." ? That makes no sense.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

no, she listens to the story and cuts out an animal and glues it to a paper. The therapist is saying a key phrase that my daughter is matching to her pictures and coloring it the color she hears.

Yet it's still a repetitious activity with specific goals (even if those goals are unknown to the child). Unless you're trying to say that your therapist just plays arbitrary games with your daughter and hopes she gets something out of it?

But never mind the actual activities, the point is your daughter is receiving language therapy, and this is typical for children with cochlear implants. Again, I'm not sure why you and Rick and others are trying so hard to downplay this truth.

it is not repeatative. Why do you not understand that? Each time it is a different activity, with the same goal, but done in different ways. Another game with the same goal could be putting together mr. Potato head. The therapist would ask the child to hand them a specific part with two critical elements embedded within a phrase. Same goal, different words and different game.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

i said that my daughter spoken with inappropriate grammar when she was first learning spoken English, yes. And that would have been back when she was still a new implant user and in an ASL environment. So, no that wouldn't be the result of a spoken language program.

"My daughter spoken with ..." ? That makes no sense.

oops, i'll correct it. Thanks.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



it is not repeatative. Why do you not understand that? Each time it is a different activity, with the same goal, but done in different ways. Another game with the same goal could be putting together mr. Potato head. The therapist would ask the child to hand them a specific part with two critical elements embedded within a phrase. Same goal, different words and different game.

MM is referring to internal repetiveness...with the individual activities themselves.:roll: And he is absolutely correct. They are repetitive and directive.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



oops, i'll correct it. Thanks.

See? Correction and repetiveness. Excellent demonstration.