District files appeal against deaf student

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cloggy said:
Excellent, thanks very much.....

A study with "17 children with implants and their matched peers " and "35 students with implants and 35 randomly selected students with hearing aids" and "83 students identified as using cochlear implants, and they were compared to 71 randomly selected peers with hearing aids."

Now I wonder, these are students that made it to that level. The question now is:
How many (as a percentage) of the children with CI never made it to that level, and how many children without CI made it, or never made it..?
Click to expand...

Did you readthe whole article cloggy? Obviously not. When you have done so, and are able to enter into an informed discussion, let me know.
 
Cloggy said:
In the same journal, same issue I also found:


(The underlining and fatt print are done by me.)

I have to say, unlike you, my focus goes to "Reading comprehension scores of children with implants were significantly better than those of deaf children without implants, although the performance in implant users was substantially lagging behind that in hearing children."

So is the one study more relevant compared to the other.... Guess not, unless, like you you weigh the validity of the study by the size of the group..... in that case.....

POP
Click to expand...

And, as this was a literature review of several studies, did you also read the limitations regarding the one in which you cite? You must do that, as well. And, as your claim is that a CI child functions as a hearing child, doesn't the documented lag disporve your claimthat CI children are "hearing" and therefore function the same as hearing children? I do believe it does disprove that claim.

In addition, it further states that those who performed at the most comparable rates to hearing children were those CI users that have been exposed to both sign and speech in the academic environment. As well as stating that CI is a tool, and a useful one at that, but the assumptionthat a CI child will function as a hearing child in the academic environment is an incorrect assumption. That supports everythingthat shel and I both have asserted regarding the education of deaf children.

And the information regarding validity and limitation is included in the article,a nd is broken down study by study. And, cloggy, it is scientifically sound asessment based on acceptable measures for validity and reliabiltiy, not the opinion of someone who has no knowledge or experience in research methodolgy.
 
jillio said:
Post # 1032. All of the information you need to find the complete article is available to you. Let's see how motivated you are to learn something.
Click to expand...
To me it looks like part of an article. Also, suddenly you put your comment in there.. where does the article end, and do you start?

Finding the article is not the problem. Paying for it is. Not everyone has the complete article available..... yet..

But thank you for your first article... it's been very informative....

If you can find an article that everyone can read - completely -, that would be a nice improvement....
And feel freen to start a new topic with it....
 
jillio said:
Did you readthe whole article cloggy? Obviously not. When you have done so, and are able to enter into an informed discussion, let me know.
Click to expand...


To everyone..... who has access to the WHOLE article in order to be "able to enter into an informed discussion."


Jillio,....
If you want a discussion about an article, make sure eveyone is able to read the complete article.... without having to pay $25,= to be able to read it.
 
Cloggy said:
To me it looks like part of an article. Also, suddenly you put your comment in there.. where does the article end, and do you start?

Finding the article is not the problem. Paying for it is. Not everyone has the complete article available..... yet..

But thank you for your first article... it's been very informative....

If you can find an article that everyone can read - completely -, that would be a nice improvement....
And feel freen to start a new topic with it....
Click to expand...

That is not my first article, nor do you have to pay for it. The citation at the beginning in APA format tells you what you need to know to locate it.nnAnd everyone can read this one.

You got any research to refute it with?
 
shel90 said:
Why only oral language? Why not both?

Another thing, by encouraging more and more children to be put in oral-only programs will endanger many jobs that deaf people hold as teachers, teacher aides and counselors. Ironic that the education of the deaf will put deaf people out of jobs simply because they cant "talk". :roll:
Click to expand...

As Jillo and you have stated before aren't we suppose to focus on what the kids need not if us as educators need jobs. It will be my job that will be eliminated first. I am really OK with this because I am sure that I will find another job elsewhere. Well actually by the time this happens I will be a cert AVT so I am already lining up my next job.

Why oral language only because we need to focus on the implant first. If a parent is seeking an implant then they focus on developing oral language. Once a child has a strong oral base then I think adding signing like at the age my children did is a great tool for them.

Shel I really do not think you will ever be out of a job. An implant is not for everyone. It is a parent personal choice if they want their child to get implant. There will still be many parents that choose the signing path, which is great for them.
 
Cloggy said:
To everyone..... who has access to the WHOLE article in order to be "able to enter into an informed discussion."


Jillio,....
If you want a discussion about an article, make sure eveyone is able to read the complete article.... without having to pay $25,= to be able to read it.
Click to expand...

If you don't have access from your home computer, cloggy, you can acccess it through any library. Very simple process. And that is the way that any valuable article is. They are published in professional journals, not found online through some Google search. And given that this article is approximately 10 pages long, it is impossible to post the entire thing. I have provided you the information needed, as well as provided several quotes directly from the article.

As was previously suspected, you have no intention of making an effort to inform yourself. I did what I needed to do to find the information for myself. As a reasonable,t hinking adult it would be assummed that you would be cpcable of doing the same. Your refusal to do so only indicatges that your motivation is not to discuss the issues, but simply to divert the issue.

I have no interest in continuing a discussion with someone who isn;t even cpable of making minimal effeort to support their position. When you find the gumption to actually make an effort to learn, rather than spouting off at the mouth, get back to me.
 
jillio said:
Shall I go back and find the post for you jackie? I'd haqte for you to think people are picking on you again, so I will ask your permission before I actually quote the words you used.
Click to expand...

Yes please do, I know that I have what some people might think a limited exposure to other methods but you stated that I do not have any exposure and that is not accurate.
 
jillio said:
Geez. No, jackie, it is not the complete article. If you will look at the above citation, you will see that the entire journal article is several pages long, and is a review of numerous studies performed in the past 5 years. Ever hear of a library?
Click to expand...

I was simply asking a question. I said that I hadn't be able to read what you post it yet. There is no reason for you to get upset with me. And I do know what a library is. I actually have used libraries in the past. And I still remember how to look up a journal article and with the information you gave I will this coming week go and pull the article. Thank you for the info.
 
Cloggy said:
To everyone..... who has access to the WHOLE article in order to be "able to enter into an informed discussion."


Jillio,....
If you want a discussion about an article, make sure eveyone is able to read the complete article.... without having to pay $25,= to be able to read it.
Click to expand...

That's a great point

Jillo is there someway you can post the entire article. I have access to our local college the one closest to me is where I received my second crdential so I can still go in and copy articles, I just have pay for the copy fee.

I know that I also have many articles in my garage from when I did my master's project, they are about 7 or 8 years old. Plus, I got thinking about what Pek said and I am going to do some more research. Since I am going to be so lonely without my kids next week and I will begin then.
 
jackiesolorzano said:
I was simply asking a question. I said that I hadn't be able to read what you post it yet. There is no reason for you to get upset with me. And I do know what a library is. I actually have used libraries in the past. And I still remember how to look up a journal article and with the information you gave I will this coming week go and pull the article. Thank you for the info.
Click to expand...

You are very welcome. I apologize for snapping, but I keep running into people who don't want to make the effort to even look the article up after I have provided all the information necessary for them to do so. I find it a bit ridiculas that they would expect me to post an entire 10 page research article simply for their convienience, especially when I ahve made it easy for them to locate it.
 
jackiesolorzano said:
That's a great point

Jillo is there someway you can post the entire article. I have access to our local college the one closest to me is where I received my second crdential so I can still go in and copy articles, I just have pay for the copy fee.

I know that I also have many articles in my garage from when I did my master's project, they are about 7 or 8 years old. Plus, I got thinking about what Pek said and I am going to do some more research. Since I am going to be so lonely without my kids next week and I will begin then.
Click to expand...

If you have access to your old college library you should be able to access the article online. No charge. This is a 10 page article. Can't post the whole thing.
 
jackiesolorzano said:
Yes please do, I know that I have what some people might think a limited exposure to other methods but you stated that I do not have any exposure and that is not accurate.
Click to expand...

Nope, go back and read it. I said "extremely limited." And could you please answer the question regarding why oral language has to be the primary focus in CI kids? I posted it on pg. 35, I think, or maybe 36.
 
Why oral language only because we need to focus on the implant first. If a parent is seeking an implant then they focus on developing oral language. Once a child has a strong oral base then I think adding signing like at the age my children did is a great tool for them.
Click to expand...
Yes, but what about those kids who will be delayed b/c they haven't picked up speech? Yes, your way doesn't create severe spoken language delays, like in the old days.........but it still does create significent delays.
But you do have one thing right. The debate now is pretty much over which language should be a dhh kid's first language. Its very indivdual. Some kids with CIs can pick up speech only with minimal speech therapy or private AVT. Others need to attend specialized therapists or schools and so on.
Why can't someone send their kid to an oral program part time, and ALSO send their kid to a TC/ASL program? That way they'd get the best of both worlds.
And I think that oral first kids should learn ASL EARLY. Like most hoh kids can pick up speech really easily. They should be exposed to ASL so that they can use it as a helpful tool if they want it. Too many hoh kids have just been brushed off into the hearing world. I think most hoh kids could benifit from preschool and kindergarten instruction. I mean god.........we have parents lining up their kids to send them to upper crust schools where another language is used in insturction.
That is what you and rick and cloggy don't get whatsoever. The oral philosophy pathologizes Sign. It sees Sign as a "crutch" but not a honest to god full fledged language of its OWN!
Deaf kids (except for peri and post lingal) need to experiance agressive intervention in the form of BOTH ASL and speech so that they aren't behind at all! Imagine that............we could raise kids who are fluent in BOTH ASL and English (and yes, I mean SPOKEN language)
Despite what the oral experts tell you, VERY FEW Deafies are anti-speech.
Speech is a good tool to have. Its just like the tool of being fluent in English in South Africa or India is a good tool to have, even if your first language is Afrikaans or some Hindu dialect.
 
deafdyke said:
Yes, but what about those kids who will be delayed b/c they haven't picked up speech? Yes, your way doesn't create severe spoken language delays, like in the old days.........but it still does create significent delays.
But you do have one thing right. The debate now is pretty much over which language should be a dhh kid's first language. Its very indivdual. Some kids with CIs can pick up speech only with minimal speech therapy or private AVT. Others need to attend specialized therapists or schools and so on.
Why can't someone send their kid to an oral program part time, and ALSO send their kid to a TC/ASL program? That way they'd get the best of both worlds.
And I think that oral first kids should learn ASL EARLY. Like most hoh kids can pick up speech really easily. They should be exposed to ASL so that they can use it as a helpful tool if they want it. Too many hoh kids have just been brushed off into the hearing world. I think most hoh kids could benifit from preschool and kindergarten instruction. I mean god.........we have parents lining up their kids to send them to upper crust schools where another language is used in insturction.
That is what you and rick and cloggy don't get whatsoever. The oral philosophy pathologizes Sign. It sees Sign as a "crutch" but not a honest to god full fledged language of its OWN!
Deaf kids (except for peri and post lingal) need to experiance agressive intervention in the form of BOTH ASL and speech so that they aren't behind at all! Imagine that............we could raise kids who are fluent in BOTH ASL and English (and yes, I mean SPOKEN language)
Despite what the oral experts tell you, VERY FEW Deafies are anti-speech.
Speech is a good tool to have. Its just like the tool of being fluent in English in South Africa or India is a good tool to have, even if your first language is Afrikaans or some Hindu dialect.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The focus needs to be on language acquisition, not the implant. The intention of the implant is to provide increased auditory input. It is incorrect to assume that simply becasue increased auditory input has been achieved, oral language will increase as a result. As was stated in research I posted in this thread. It wa also found that the CI users who comapred most favorably to hearing controls were those who had been given sign and speech skills, and were included in an academic environment that utilized both. In addition, the premise of sign impeding the development of oral language was disproven years ago.
 
becasue increased auditory input has been achieved, oral language will increase as a result.
Click to expand...
Or that increased auditory input means that they are more "hearing" then deaf.
Althou I don't have too much experiance with CIs, CI kids are (best case) functionally hoh. I am hoh. Have been hoh, oral and mainstreamed my entire life. Although there are good things about having oral skills and good parts about being mainstreamed, I really honestly think that the experts who push "a mainstream" healthy normal life, are really out of touch with the downsides of going that way.
Hoh kids have been mainstreamed and oraliszed to the max. Yet our acheivement levels haven't been all that impressive. Sure there are some students who have done well, but overall as a group hoh acheivement isn't that great. Maybe its time to stop automaticly assuming that oral speech and mainstream existance should be the be all and end all of a dhh kids' existance
 
deafdyke said:
rick and jackie it is NOT just the parents who are at fault. There are TONS of parents who are invovled but whose kids don't do really well for whatever reason. Not all kids who don't do well have noninvolved parents. Matter of fact if I recall correctly, research has shown that while there may be kids who can really do well
through therapists and things like that, most oral sucesses are the result of the private school(private oral schools) effect. That measn that you'll get many high acheiving parents, with good health insurance, good family dynamics, relatively wealthy (I bet the number of working class or poor oral sucesses is VERY small) !
Click to expand...

Why do you continue to use class warfare for your arguments. Oh yeah cause the 'rich' like to use all the new toys. :ugh3: ( I believe that Rick and Jackie ARE working class, could be wrong but seems that way)
 
QUOTshel90;818924[]E=The CI has nothing to do with it...deaf children with HAs, mild hearing losses, CIs or nothing are still being placed in oral only programs in which they struggle before finally they are placed in a signing environment but by then it is almost too late for most of them due to passing the critical years of language development. .[/QUOTE]

Oh NO!! You mean myself and my daughter should have been in classes at the deaf school because our formative years included hearing loss in the mild/mod area? No Shel don't think so. Each child is indivdual. All of us deaf/Deaf/ hoh people are individuals. Parents vary, staff vary and neither my daughter or I feel deprived because we were raised in an 'oral' enviroment. Were there challenges to living with a mod/severe hearing loss, sure and for myself they were actually more then for my daughter since I never did do very well with HA's.

I'm happy you want to advocate for the children, I agree that both options should be used from birth and after implantation of a CI, but then people like you do need to realize that those children using both will choose which to use as their 'base' language. Many like Cloggy's Lotte choose to use verbal communication, and that is her choice. I do believe that MSAD has developed a program or was working on one for the kids who use the CI, to give them both options. So even deaf schools are having to adapt to kids who can hear with their implants. That is good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top