Dislike my cochlear device after 3 years using it...??

[BecLak]

So you DO agree that there should be SOME immersion with the hearing world? FJ was talking about COMPLETE ASL immersion. I know people are saying "well that's impossible! You can't avoid the hearing world!" But we are talking about little kids here, before the age of, say,.. 6. Little kids mostly interact with other kids at school or with parents at home. So if parents do ASL and the school is ASL based, that makes it a completely ASL immersed environment.

Therapy isn't the solution to acquiring the ability to speak?

So you believe deaf people can speak (if they want to) without therapy?

Do others agree with this?

No I personally do not agree that a deaf child needs to learn to speak, please do not try to twist my words. Visual and sign language surpasses all barriers of communication and is the most natural for a deaf child or person......But if a child chooses of their own accord to speak, it should be taught without therapy with the mother and family members teaching the child, with perhaps the added support of school if speech is used there (optional)

 

[Daredevel7]

No I personally do not agree that a deaf child needs to learn to speak, please do not try to twist my words. Visual and sign language surpasses all barriers of communication and is the most natural for a deaf child or person......But if a child chooses of their own accord to speak, it should be taught without therapy with the mother and family members teaching the child, with perhaps the added support of school if speech is used there (optional)

I'm sorry for giving you the wrong impression. I meant IN THE CASE of the child WANTING to speak, you DO agree that there needs to be some immersion in the hearing world? You answered that question in the bolded above.

Does anyone else (other than FJ ) believe that speech therapy is not needed even if a child wants to speak? I'm genuinely curious since so many people talk about whether speaking is important or not, so no one ever really talks about whether speech therapy itself is actually needed IF the child wants to speak.

 

[GrendelQ]

So you believe deaf people can speak (if they want to) without therapy?

Do others agree with this?

That'a a tough one, I don't know. I think it varies so much with each child and with what your objectives are. I don't think I'll know in our case for some time to come. We had auditory rehabilitation -- listening therapy -- during the first year Li was activated as part of her early intervention activities. I think that was so helpful: we were able to understand whether or not a missing sound was typical at that particular age or an indication that an electrode needed to be adjusted next time we mapped the CI because she wasn't hearing that consonant.

I'd say that we haven't had true 'speech therapy,' and yet I think my daughter is developing at an age appropriate level. But we're at a school for the deaf that's got a very specialized program in place. The teachers have such a high level of expertise, and even though our focus is on language development, social interaction and just learning how to learn and socialize at this age, I may be finding speech therapy unnecessary because it is actually built into her learning environment every day. Just as one TOD might repeat a handshape, or model ASL for the children while teaching them how to tell time, there are TODs with SLP expertise in the classroom with them, and SLPs dropping in throughout the day, so they are developing skills with guidance during story time, and explorations, and gym class, and while feeding the class hamster, it's just not as part of a pull-out or speech session. It's all very organic as they go through their regular curriculum. If she's at the Big Apple Circus or the Boston Library with her class, the teachers are introducing vocabulary and pronunciation and proper handshapes. They take train rides and go apple picking, visit the local fire station, and in a way, it is all a form of speech therapy and ASL dexterity development, I suppose. It's just not stereotypical drilling mouth movements out of context in 20 minute sessions, it's not fingerspelling practice or boring pages of vocab drilling.

I asked my daughter's SLP to train me a bit, so she took me through some typical learning activities, and sort of lifted the curtain -- showed me what was underlying various activities in terms of communication skills. I videotaped her doing this so I could find ways of incorporating it into Li's day to day, too. It was a lot of playing and letting Li drive the communication. And her SLP told me that honestly, just playing with her, reading to and with her, and interacting was enough at home, no need to "work" at it.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

And I was stating that a child has exposure and learns entire (using FJ's own description) and mastery of language through regular class in school and at home by learning to read and other visual methods, and not by speech therapy, whether it be 20 minutes or a whole day, week, month, year/s etc of therapy.

Like Jillio says, speech therapy is only for conversational purposes and helps only some, and not for the mastery of language acquisition.

No, I do not agree with FJ's post even in this thread.

Let's ignore mastery of English (or language acquisition) and imagine that your deaf child (age: 4 yrs old) is already fluent in ASL for her age and you, for whatever reason, want your child to learn how to speak also. How would you do this? 20 minutes a day of speech therapy?

obviously, this situation actually happened to me!

our choice was either remain at a deaf school that would not allow any auditory learning, or spoken language, other than sim-com during once a week pull out therapy, or move to a spoken language program that was willing to add some sign to support her.

we chose to move her.

 

[shel90]

If you are referring to what FJ wrote (20 minutes of pull out a day will not teach a person an entire language ... you need exposure, etc.) -- I agree with her. I don't think that a small child can become fluent in ASL, spoken/written English, written English, Spanish, Mandarin, whatever the language -- with such limited access. Language acquisition requires the use of and exposure to that language.

Did your brother really become fluent in ASL at the age of 4, 5, or 6 through only 20 minutes of pull-out learning in the language, with no other input in the language during the entire school day (no access to peers signing, to teachers using ASL, no expressive use of ASL during the day outside that 20 minute session?)[/QUOT

The point is that FJ is claiming that in a voice off environment, deaf kids will never master English. I was saying if that was true, then my brother and many others wouldnt be able to read and write in English. That's the whole point. She is making false claims about ASL.

 

[shel90]

Shel, you claimed that you didn't learn signs till in your 20's or so. Yet, also claimed that your brother grew up using ASL. Then how did you communicate with your brother if you didn't know signs at the time?

lots of play interaction ..we never really had long conversations. Mostly gestures and few words here and there. However, my brother learned English by reading and writing in the elementary ages so we wrote to each other sometimes.

In all the years I have been involved with the Deaf community, I have been amazed at how people without speech skills found ways to communicate with those who dont sign. You would be amazed as well.

 

[deafdyke]

My kid did it in an hour a week. And that was just for articulation and only from age 3 to 7. The rest he picked up by making sure that he was in a bilingual environment

o she took me through some typical learning activities, and sort of lifted the curtain -- showed me what was underlying various activities in terms of communication skills. I videotaped her doing this so I could find ways of incorporating it into Li's day to day, too. It was a lot of playing and letting Li drive the communication. And her SLP told me that honestly, just playing with her, reading to and with her, and interacting was enough at home, no need to "work" at it.

Exactly!!!! Kids can pick up spoken English with regular daily exposure. We live in a majority English speaking country. It's pretty hard to avoid being exposed to spoken English, unless of course you live in Manhatten Chinatown.
However, sessions with a speech language pathologist can and do help to correct language errors and stuff. Regular daily exposure (not the whole school day or the entire day) can really ensure that kids don't have as big a spoken language gap (it's pretty rare for dhh kids to be completely and totally on par spoken language wise)
You know, I caught up with spoken language pretty fast by just being in a GENERAL special needs (all kinds of disabilties) preschool.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

If you are referring to what FJ wrote (20 minutes of pull out a day will not teach a person an entire language ... you need exposure, etc.) -- I agree with her. I don't think that a small child can become fluent in ASL, spoken/written English, written English, Spanish, Mandarin, whatever the language -- with such limited access. Language acquisition requires the use of and exposure to that language.

Did your brother really become fluent in ASL at the age of 4, 5, or 6 through only 20 minutes of pull-out learning in the language, with no other input in the language during the entire school day (no access to peers signing, to teachers using ASL, no expressive use of ASL during the day outside that 20 minute session?)[/QUOT

The point is that FJ is claiming that in a voice off environment, deaf kids will never master English. I was saying if that was true, then my brother and many others wouldnt be able to read and write in English. That's the whole point. She is making false claims about ASL.

no, i have specifically, over and over, said that reading and writing are COMPLETELY unrelated to spoken english. One can easily have one without the other.

i am saying that no one can learn any language without using and being exposed to a language. And pull out speech therapy is not enough time to learn a language.

would anyone here advocate teaching ASL through an hour a week sessions?

 

[Daredevel7]

Correct me if I am wrong but... if a child is too young to read, s/he must be all ASL in a bi-bi (ASL and written English) environment for the time being.

 

[BecLak]

Wirelessly posted

no, i have specifically, over and over, said that reading and writing are COMPLETELY unrelated to spoken english. One can easily have one without the other.

i am saying that no one can learn any language without using and being exposed to a language. And pull out speech therapy is not enough time to learn a language.

would anyone here advocate teaching ASL through an hour a week sessions?

But what you are saying is that someone cannot learn the mechanics of the spoken language without speech therapy, how much time in speech therapy is irrelevent. I am saying the contrary. Speech therapy helps some, but someone can know and master the entire language without therapy and without access to sound, there are many visual methods.

 

[GrendelQ]

But what you are saying is that someone cannot learn the mechanics of the spoken language without speech therapy, how much time in speech therapy is irrelevent. I am saying the contrary. Speech therapy helps some, but someone can know and master the entire language without therapy and without access to sound, there are many visual methods.

Isn't she writing, again and again, that significant exposure to language is necessary, and NOT speech therapy as a means to acquiring the language? Where are you seeing her advocate for speech therapy as the way to learn language?

 

[BecLak]

Isn't she writing, again and again, that significant exposure to language is necessary, and NOT speech therapy as a means to acquiring the language? Where are you seeing her advocate for speech therapy as the way to learn language?

I would like to get that clarified from FJ herself.

 

[GrendelQ]

no, i have specifically, over and over, said that reading and writing are COMPLETELY unrelated to spoken english. One can easily have one without the other.

i am saying that no one can learn any language without using and being exposed to a language. And pull out speech therapy is not enough time to learn a language.

would anyone here advocate teaching ASL through an hour a week sessions?

Beclak, I think FJ has written this plainly several times.

 

[inmate23]

Wirelessly posted



obviously, this situation actually happened to me!

our choice was either remain at a deaf school that would not allow any auditory learning, or spoken language, other than sim-com during once a week pull out therapy, or move to a spoken language program that was willing to add some sign to support her.

we chose to move her.

from memory you cried when miss kat asked to go to "talking" school. you followed her decision and followed her in what SHE asked for

 

[shel90]

Correct me if I am wrong but... if a child is too young to read, s/he must be all ASL in a bi-bi (ASL and written English) environment for the time being.

Most, if not all, are given the opportunity to develop speech skills using English as well.

FJ just has a problem with ASL being the language of instruction at the Deaf schools. That is what it seems like what she is complaining about. *shrugs*

 

[GrendelQ]

Most, if not all, are given the opportunity to develop speech skills using English as well.

FJ just has a problem with ASL being the language of instruction at the Deaf schools. That is what it seems like what she is complaining about. *shrugs*

Seems the problem some of us have is with ONLY ASL or ONLY spoken language being the language of instruction and conversation within the classroom (rather than an isolated pullout session 1-3 X a week or watching Signing Time videos here and there) for those of us who want to raise our children bilingual.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

no, i have specifically, over and over, said that reading and writing are COMPLETELY unrelated to spoken english. One can easily have one without the other.

i am saying that no one can learn any language without using and being exposed to a language. And pull out speech therapy is not enough time to learn a language.

would anyone here advocate teaching ASL through an hour a week sessions?

But what you are saying is that someone cannot learn the mechanics of the spoken language without speech therapy, how much time in speech therapy is irrelevent. I am saying the contrary. Speech therapy helps some, but someone can know and master the entire language without therapy and without access to sound, there are many visual methods.

actually, i'm advocating access to the language and immersion, NOT speech therapy. Therapy is for articulation NOT language learning. You can't teach language fluently through therapy.

i am saying the opposite of what you think.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Most, if not all, are given the opportunity to develop speech skills using English as well.

FJ just has a problem with ASL being the language of instruction at the Deaf schools. That is what it seems like what she is complaining about. *shrugs*

Seems the problem some of us have is with ONLY ASL or ONLY spoken language being the language of instruction and conversation within the classroom (rather than an isolated pullout session 1-3 X a week or watching Signing Time videos here and there) for those of us who want to raise our children bilingual.

yes, that.

 

[posts from hell]

get lost FJ

 

[Daredevel7]

Oooh ouch!

kazing!