Cochlear decison

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



no, kids with implants are able to pick up incidental language through listening. That is how they learn language. The kids that turn out the best are the kids that exposed to the most language for them to pick up.

If they are picking up language through incidental learning and hearing, why all the directive therapy?

Kids that turn out "the best"? I see. Kids who develop more spoken language are "the best." And to that end, kids without spoken language are "the worst".

Once again, your motive is spoken language and ending up with a child that most closely resembles a hearing child that surgical intervention and constant therapy can provide. Thanks for the cofirmation.

no, that statement is about children with and without hearing loss. Kids with talkative parents end up with better language and literacy. The same thing could be said about ASL. The better the family is with the language, the more sophisticated the language the child is exposed to, the better their language turns out.

just because YOU interpret the message one way does not make it so.

 

[Mountain Man]

no, that would not be my experience, and i have a very late implanted child. I do not consider playing "i spy" or "20 questions" in the car, reading books together and discussing life together to be "intensive therapy". I call it living.

So that's all the therapy she receives and has ever received? The occasional game and heart to heart talk?

Sorry, but I don't believe you.

Kids with talkative parents end up with better language and literacy. The same thing could be said about ASL. The better the family is with the language, the more sophisticated the language the child is exposed to, the better their language turns out.

You've never taken a class in linguistics, have you? Because everything you said in the above paragraph is pretty much dead wrong.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



no, that statement is about children with and without hearing loss. Kids with talkative parents end up with better language and literacy. The same thing could be said about ASL. The better the family is with the language, the more sophisticated the language the child is exposed to, the better their language turns out.

just because YOU interpret the message one way does not make it so.

Do you have anything other than your opinion to back that nonsense up?

No one needs to do any interpreting of your message. You make it very clear.

 

[dogmom]

below taken from part of longer paragraph of earlier an earlier post:
quote:
"Therefore, the easiest and most complete way to learn an auditory language would be through audition."
end quote-

how could auditory learning be the easiest way for someone <who can see> who's strongest sense is visual?

I don't know how much fun I'd have had as a kid at the zoo, or coloring or looking at picture books or whatever - if my experiences with those activities were all specifically "designed" for some goal outside of my own facilitation.

 

[Beowulf]

below taken from part of longer paragraph of earlier an earlier post:
quote:
"Therefore, the easiest and most complete way to learn an auditory language would be through audition."
end quote-

how could auditory learning be the easiest way for someone <who can see> who's strongest sense is visual?

I don't know how much fun I'd have had as a kid at the zoo, or coloring or looking at picture books or whatever - if my experiences with those activities were all specifically "designed" for some goal outside of my own facilitation.

I agree. Is it just me, or are these hearing parents starting to sound more and more as if they are imagining their "successes" with their children? It seems like it. Just my opinion.

 

[GrendelQ]

The directive language therapy my child receives is to develop her ASL, because she was a year old before being exposed to it and required a lot of catching up and our household use is functional, but not yet fluent. We feel she needs intensive work on a daily basis to ensure she doesn't fall behind. Although she's in an ASL environment from 6:30am - 4pm each day, in the evening and weekend she's with family and friends whose use is not at all at the sophisticated level a child needs to be exposed to. Even though it's designed with her learning in mind, it's not drill-oriented: the program is social, and from what I observe and from her feedback, she's completely OK with the intensity, and it's so much fun for her. It's an immersive environment we started when she was a year old, and I think continued learning of the language is one of the most important aspects of her academic life. I don't see it as a negative experience, I hope she shares that and looks back with positive memories. And I'm not imagining her abilities, her teachers say she's doing beautifully.

Yes, developing ASL takes a great deal more work on her part than developing English, but I think it's important, and she likes it.

She has 2 CIs through which she has full access to speech sounds at the levels of a typical hearing child, and we found that from the start -- her CI was activated shortly before she turned 2 -- she began naturally acquiring English from her environment, despite the emphasis on ASL as her primary language. We took the advice of the professionals and outside her schooldays we fill her world with conversation, we tell stories, she tells stories, we talk about what we're doing, where we're going, what our plans are, we sing, and so on. We don't do drills or repetitive, mechanical stuff, except for annoying knock knock jokes, which she'll tell for hours on end, but that's her choice -- definitely not ours. It's pretty much what good parents do naturally -- fill their child's world with language -- except that we have learned the language development theories and strategies behind why we're doing it, and we have reams of studies at our fingertips to support why this approach works.

I don't think it's a scary prospect at all, whether your focus is ASL or English or both -- developing language doesn't have to be a painful thing. But doing it in a way that provides your child with what he or she needs to communicate takes effort and intentionality whether your child is hearing or deaf, no matter what language it is.

 

[jillio]

How do you determine that learning ASL requires more effort on her part than developing English?

Also, how do you determine that she is acquiring English naturally through audition alone?

Isn't your daughter 5?

What is your response to the reams of evidence indicating that early gains of CI implanted children in regard to spoken language development are soon lost?

 

[jillio]

I agree. Is it just me, or are these hearing parents starting to sound more and more as if they are imagining their "successes" with their children? It seems like it. Just my opinion.

You know the old saying about seeing what one wants to see? It certainly seems to apply here.

 

[GrendelQ]

How do you determine that learning ASL requires more effort on her part than developing English?

Also, how do you determine that she is acquiring English naturally through audition alone?

Isn't your daughter 5?

What is your response to the reams of evidence indicating that early gains of CI implanted children in regard to spoken language development are soon lost?

1. She has been taking formal classes in learning ASL since she was 1; last year, we've increased her exposure to advanced language models to improve her vocabulary, which was lagging; her use is far less sophisticated and complex than her use of English, which she began developing a year later.

2. My husband isn't sneaking her off to speech therapy on the sly

3. Yes, she's 5.

4. I've seen reams of evidence that support this approach, not reams that say early gains are lost by 7, not even a few pages; yes, I've also seen Marschark's studies that say bilingual education hasn't been shown to provide better results for deaf kids in general, but we have found that it does with our child.

 

[jillio]

1. She has been taking formal classes in learning ASL since she was 1; last year, we've increased her exposure to advanced language models to improve her vocabulary, which was lagging; her use is far less sophisticated and complex than her use of English, which she began developing a year later.

2. My husband isn't sneaking her off to speech therapy on the sly

3. Yes, she's 5.

4. I've seen reams of evidence that support this approach, not reams that say early gains are lost by 7, not even a few pages; yes, I've also seen Marschark's studies that say bilingual education hasn't been shown to provide better results for deaf kids in general, but we have found that it does with our child.

Formal ASL classes? At the age of 1? Interesting.

I see. So you don't have any results from testing instuments that would verify your parental observations.

Perhaps you haven't seen them, but they are there.

 

[GrendelQ]

Formal ASL classes? At the age of 1? Interesting.

I see. So you don't have any results from testing instuments that would verify your parental observations.

Perhaps you haven't seen them, but they are there.

Yes, I've seen results of testing instruments, quite a few. Did I give the impression I hadn't? She's participating in two different longitudinal studies, along with language assessments through the school, the deaf and hoh program at children's hospital.

 

[Sunshine]

So I guess people like my brother and many of my friends who have no speech skills are at the bottom of the pile like garbage.

Nice view on deaf people that hearing society has of us. Nice.

I have no speech skill AND my handwriting look like chicken have seizure while trying to scratch. Guess I'm very bottom of that pile!!!! Lol

 

[deafskeptic]

Oh that woman was a nightmare!!!!

You knew that mother?

 

[shel90]

You knew that mother?

I used to be a member of deafread and that mother told me through deafread that she wanted all deaf schools to get shut down to save the taxpayers money because children with CIs wont need ASL. I was so sick to my stomach because she knew that I was a supporter of ASL, Deaf culture, and deaf schools.

 

[jillio]

Yes, I've seen results of testing instruments, quite a few. Did I give the impression I hadn't? She's participating in two different longitudinal studies, along with language assessments through the school, the deaf and hoh program at children's hospital.

Ahh, I see. Which testing instruments would those have been?

Longitudinal studies sponsored by whom?

 

[jillio]

I used to be a member of deafread and that mother told me through deafread that she wanted all deaf schools to get shut down to save the taxpayers money because children with CIs wont need ASL. I was so sick to my stomach because she knew that I was a supporter of ASL, Deaf culture, and deaf schools.

I will back you up on that one. I saw her posts as well.

 

[rebeccalj]

Wirelessly posted



no, that statement is about children with and without hearing loss. Kids with talkative parents end up with better language and literacy. The same thing could be said about ASL. The better the family is with the language, the more sophisticated the language the child is exposed to, the better their language turns out.

just because YOU interpret the message one way does not make it so.

You are misled. Kids with talkative parents end up feeling far more loved because they *feel* their parents are invested in them. In that, they are encouraged, through the love and encouragement of their parents, to succeed in whatever it is that is their passion. Language, to me, is secondary in this instance and not relevant.

 

[Banjo]

I will back you up on that one. I saw her posts as well.

Same here, some of her posts got right down nasty at times.

 

[jillio]

In a study done comparing language development and executive functioning in CI implanted deaf children, HA using deaf children, and hearing children, Niparko, et.al. found the following:

Implanted and nonimplanted deaf children performed below the level of hearing children on tests assessing oral receptive language, as well as on a number of EF tests, but no significant differences emerged between the implanted and nonimplanted deaf groups.

In other words, nonimplanted deaf children and implanted deaf children showed no difference in their performance. The only difference was between the hearing children, and the deaf children (both implanted and nonimplanted).

In the same study, Niparko, et.al also found:

NH children had better receptive vocabulary and grammar than CI and HA children, supporting the critical dependence of aural–oral language development on spoken language exposure. Given that cochlear implants facilitate access to sound, CI children were expected to have better language than their nonimplanted deaf peers, but this was not the case.

I found it very interesting that greater access to sound did not produce the results expected.

And these results came from the medical community and were published in JAMA. 2010 April 21; 303(15): 1498–1506.

 

[deafskeptic]

I used to be a member of deafread and that mother told me through deafread that she wanted all deaf schools to get shut down to save the taxpayers money because children with CIs wont need ASL. I was so sick to my stomach because she knew that I was a supporter of ASL, Deaf culture, and deaf schools.

Ah ah, I think I remember you posting about that once.