Mom of deaf daughter...hi!

Teacherofthedeaf said:
As the parent, you are the driving force behind the IFSP. Your concerns and goals should be what matters. For example, I have a family whose IFSP says, "The family wants S. to develop spoken language commiserate with his hearing peers." So, that is what we are doing. The family is learning the strategies to have him develop spoken language, he gets daily aural rehab and speech therapy and access to my classroom group. While he has a profound hearing loss, he has received bilateral cochlear implants and is gaining language super fast!
.
Click to expand...
Please stop insistuating that oral only somehow produces superior results, and thus trying to influence this parent's approach. Yes, it's very rare for an oral kid to not be able to develop spoken language at ALL. Most dhh kids can and do develop speech, but the end results really do vary greatly, even with kids who attend oral schools or do an intense auditory verbal style approach. Many kids still have delays, it's just that they're more on the level of a kid who would have transferred to Clarke, CID, St Joseph's etc back up until about 10 years ago. They aren't as apparent when the child is young yes, but the gaps still remain. But there's this fixtation both on inclusion and trying to get away with providing low level supports in a public school, so that the school can claim they're providing a FAPE (which is usually a minimal accomondations approach) so they don't have to expend a lot of money on accomodnations. (which eat away at a school budget) It is rare for a dhh child to be 100% on par with speech, with a typical verbal IQ, and in typical (non remedial) English classes. It doesn't NOT happen, yes....but you do realize that there are still HEARING kids with language delays (not connected to IQ issues) right? You also know that only a small percentage of oral kids even attend oral schools right? Most oral kids aren't AG Bell oral, but rather " go with the mainstream b/c the parents are uninformed about schools and or the fact that HOH kids can benefit from ASL, deaf schooling, dhh classes, Cued speech etc) You also know that even with the prescreening that the private Option schools do, they still have students who they have to ask to leave b/c they are not performing at high levels.....and remember that the Option Schools only serve a very small percentage of oral kids...if the Option Schools have to ask kids to leave, imagine how bad it would be in a public oral school or a public low level resource room setting, where they are almost afraid to suggest deaf ed and ASL, due to not wanting to spend money on an outplacement.
 
deafdyke said:
But what do you do in the cases where the parent might not have realistic scenerios as to their concerns and goals? That happens quite a bit.....So why not be childcentered and give the child everything? It's SO obvious you're buying into the thinking that a comprehesive approach neglects speech/spoken language. That's why formal oralism is still around, b/c it capitalizes on the myth that a comprehensive approach neglects speech/spoken language, based on a few programs that were badly resourced. Either that or the person claiming that they don't offer speech has some sort of a vendetta against the program b/c something didn't go perfectly. I know someone who completely flipped out on an bilingal-bimodal program (that had excellent speech services and where the kids were allowed to speak) simply b/c an instructor refused to do Sim-Com. The parent was overanxious over speech services, and completely flipped out and demonized the School for the Deaf, based on that ONE incident. Up to then the parent had been pleased with the approach. Schools for the Deaf DO offer a very very comprehensive approach. The ONLY difference is that they include EVERYTHING, not just an exclusive fixtation on speech or thinking that speech will be the Answer to Life the Universe and Everything.
Click to expand...
No, I give families more credit than that. Parents love their children and want what is best for them. Professionals come and go. They have no idea what it is like to live the family's life. That is why the IFSP focuses on the family and how to best serve them all.

I am not "buying into" anything. I have many years experience both in private and public schools. I know what general education placements look like and I know what is available at the two schools for the deaf in my state and our neighboring state. They are very different from what you would get in the mainstream and very, very different from what would be standard at a school like mine. As I stated before, our state school for the Deaf does not have an audiologist, and hasn't for 3 years. The students do not wear devices and get up to 20 minutes of speech therapy a day. And that is a huge improvement. It used to be 30 minutes a week. The classrooms are ASL, so no spoken language is being used. The speech time is the only use of spoken English. That is not more comprehensive than my school, it is just using a different language.

May I ask, when was the last time you visited a state school for the Deaf?
 
deafdyke said:
Please stop insistuating that oral only somehow produces superior results, and thus trying to influence this parent's approach. Yes, it's very rare for an oral kid to not be able to develop spoken language at ALL. Most dhh kids can and do develop speech, but the end results really do vary greatly, even with kids who attend oral schools or do an intense auditory verbal style approach. Many kids still have delays, it's just that they're more on the level of a kid who would have transferred to Clarke, CID, St Joseph's etc back up until about 10 years ago. They aren't as apparent when the child is young yes, but the gaps still remain. But there's this fixtation both on inclusion and trying to get away with providing low level supports in a public school, so that the school can claim they're providing a FAPE (which is usually a minimal accomondations approach) so they don't have to expend a lot of money on accomodnations. (which eat away at a school budget) It is rare for a dhh child to be 100% on par with speech, with a typical verbal IQ, and in typical (non remedial) English classes. It doesn't NOT happen, yes....but you do realize that there are still HEARING kids with language delays (not connected to IQ issues) right? You also know that only a small percentage of oral kids even attend oral schools right? Most oral kids aren't AG Bell oral, but rather " go with the mainstream b/c the parents are uninformed about schools and or the fact that HOH kids can benefit from ASL, deaf schooling, dhh classes, Cued speech etc) You also know that even with the prescreening that the private Option schools do, they still have students who they have to ask to leave b/c they are not performing at high levels.....and remember that the Option Schools only serve a very small percentage of oral kids...if the Option Schools have to ask kids to leave, imagine how bad it would be in a public oral school or a public low level resource room setting, where they are almost afraid to suggest deaf ed and ASL, due to not wanting to spend money on an outplacement.
Click to expand...
Actually, it isn't rare. The longitudinal studies of outcomes are showing that students who receive early services are catching up. There are studies coming out of Colorado which follow all children, regardless of hearing loss level or communication modality, others that have been looking at Auditory Verbal kids, who are now adults, as well as OCHL study that followed 317 children with hearing loss across three states through 4th grade. It doesn't show what you claim.
 
deafdyke said:
And I am super glad that they did. I am impressed that they told you about ALL the different options and how things can and do drasticly change as dhh kids needs change. Almost all schools and programs for the Deaf do offer a strong comprehensive approach, including speech, Sign etc etc. It takes a village and they'll attract more kids if they offer a comprehensive approach. Actualy, I don't even think you'll have to deal with the typical " oh her needs changed so we have to do this or that.", since their approach is comprehensive and child centered. They offer everything, so there's no arguing over lack of services etc...I think the only real issue you'll deal with is when to mainstream her. (and attending preschool/kindergarten and first grade at the school would be really awesome. Then that way she could have a baseline of experience to compare with mainstreaming, and can tell you which placement she prefers.) The speech therapies tend to be excellent, and of course the early childhood programming at deaf schools/programs tends to be really good. IMHO, if there is a deaf school or a dhh program locally, then parents should take advantage of it for early intervention and early childhood. The key is not to panic, but to try to give your kid a variety of methodologies, tools etc, so they can decide which ones they like best. You might be surprised. I remember someone here who went to a deaf school, got exposed to ASL, speech etc....and she decided on her own she prefered talking. And then there are always the very verbal kids who discover that they really like ASL in addition to speech, and so on and so on....and of course many very verbal and HOH level kids love ASL and deaf culture b/c it capitalizes on their visual processing strenghs, as well as gives them a social outlet. The important thing is to give the kid the choices in the first place. You don't know what will/won't work unless you try it in the first place!!!!! Good luck, and you're BEYOND lucky to have such an awesome resource!
Click to expand...

Yes, we are definitely taking advantage of all the opportunities and resources in our town. We're very lucky to live in the same city as the state deaf school. I'm not sure if I want to mainstream her, unless she wants it. I'll let her decide, of course!
 
AnayaAtheena said:
Hi! congratulations on your baby girl!
I work in a preschool/daycare and we start teaching the babies signs for "mom" "dad" "milk" and "more" by the time most of them are 7-9 months they start signing to us because we have introduced it and reinforced it with them. The children in the pre-k classrooms know a handful of ASL but when they start mainstream school they loose it.

You have started to learn now is wonderful and your daughter will never feel alone. Having patience and showing her love while she learns will create a stronger bond between you all.
Click to expand...
Thank you! We are just trying to surround her with signs as we learn them, and I try to sign with her in the mornings while we're getting ready for the day, or when I pick her up from daycare. Working on getting her into a daycare of a lady who's son is deaf and who has cared for other students of the deaf school. We're concentrating the most on the 3 signs you mentioned. She is very interested and watches us very closely when we sign to her, so we know she's picking it up. And she's starting to play with her hands more and more, almost like trying to talk back.
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
No, I give families more credit than that. Parents love their children and want what is best for them. Professionals come and go. They have no idea what it is like to live the family's life. That is why the IFSP focuses on the family and how to best serve them all.

I am not "buying into" anything. I have many years experience both in private and public schools. I know what general education placements look like and I know what is available at the two schools for the deaf in my state and our neighboring state. They are very different from what you would get in the mainstream and very, very different from what would be standard at a school like mine. As I stated before, our state school for the Deaf does not have an audiologist, and hasn't for 3 years. The students do not wear devices and get up to 20 minutes of speech therapy a day. And that is a huge improvement. It used to be 30 minutes a week. The classrooms are ASL, so no spoken language is being used. The speech time is the only use of spoken English. That is not more comprehensive than my school, it is just using a different language.

May I ask, when was the last time you visited a state school for the Deaf?
Click to expand...
So in other words b/c you buy into the oral rhetoric as speech being the best, you make hearing parents think that it's the best route. Do you know how to analyze language used to try to persude people into a particular mindset? Oralism does that to the max. It uses VERY ableist audist language to imply somehow that a speech only route is "the best". And yes, you are. You are giving a VERY audist, ablelist view on things..... I find it VERY difficult to believe that you have a lot of experience. You really are toeing the party line here, and I honestly do not believe your claims. Deaf Schools would want to attract as many kids as possible, so of course they would want to offer a comprehensive approach. It's in their best interests....and despite what you're claiming, I really do not believe you. That just sounds like the complete stereotype that an AG Bell hardcore parent or teacher would have about Deaf Schools.......you do realize that virtually ALL schools for the Deaf have ALL kinds of kids right? How many Schools for the Deaf have you visted and actually seen? I actually bought into the AG Bell thinking that a bilingal approach neglects speech..... Guess what? I actually visited bi- bi programs, and I was mindblown with how verbal the kids were.. They wore both HAs and CIs, and they Signed and talked! Yes, those programs and Schools actually exist!
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
Actually, it isn't rare. The longitudinal studies of outcomes are showing that students who receive early services are catching up. There are studies coming out of Colorado which follow all children, regardless of hearing loss level or communication modality, others that have been looking at Auditory Verbal kids, who are now adults, as well as OCHL study that followed 317 children with hearing loss across three states through 4th grade. It doesn't show what you claim.
Click to expand...
Really? Is that the study that says that except for vocabulary oral kids are doing well? You do realize that you cannot have mastered a language without vocabulary right? Also, do those studies look at the whole child (ie academics, socialization etc) And let me guess, knowing what I know about how oralists like to twist things, they're doing something like ignoring the fourth grade ceiling when previously successful kids start really struggling. There's a reason why that study stops at fourth grade. Profound and severe language issues are rarer then they used to be yes, but once kids hit the third/4th grade level they start struggling orally and in the mainstream. Also you know that AVT kids tend to have a very high rate of dropping out...and the AVT studies are self reported, which are really inaccurate. If you spoke with the mainstream teachers or the actual kids, you'd find a very different story. I'd love to hear how the AVT brigade would react to the AVTers who are failing high school and have no friends.
 
Tristen said:
Yes, we are definitely taking advantage of all the opportunities and resources in our town. We're very lucky to live in the same city as the state deaf school. I'm not sure if I want to mainstream her, unless she wants it. I'll let her decide, of course!
Click to expand...
That's awesome.....and she will have access to some amazing amazing resources!!!!
 
deafdyke said:
So in other words b/c you buy into the oral rhetoric as speech being the best, you make hearing parents think that it's the best route. Do you know how to analyze language used to try to persude people into a particular mindset? Oralism does that to the max. It uses VERY ableist audist language to imply somehow that a speech only route is "the best". And yes, you are. You are giving a VERY audist, ablelist view on things..... I find it VERY difficult to believe that you have a lot of experience. You really are toeing the party line here, and I honestly do not believe your claims. Deaf Schools would want to attract as many kids as possible, so of course they would want to offer a comprehensive approach. It's in their best interests....and despite what you're claiming, I really do not believe you. That just sounds like the complete stereotype that an AG Bell hardcore parent or teacher would have about Deaf Schools.......you do realize that virtually ALL schools for the Deaf have ALL kinds of kids right? How many Schools for the Deaf have you visted and actually seen? I actually bought into the AG Bell thinking that a bilingal approach neglects speech..... Guess what? I actually visited bi- bi programs, and I was mindblown with how verbal the kids were.. They wore both HAs and CIs, and they Signed and talked! Yes, those programs and Schools actually exist!
Click to expand...
Where have I said anything about spoken language being best? I am stating facts about the school for the Deaf that I worked very closely with 2 years ago to help transition one of my 14 year old students to.
 
deafdyke said:
Really? Is that the study that says that except for vocabulary oral kids are doing well? You do realize that you cannot have mastered a language without vocabulary right? Also, do those studies look at the whole child (ie academics, socialization etc) And let me guess, knowing what I know about how oralists like to twist things, they're doing something like ignoring the fourth grade ceiling when previously successful kids start really struggling. There's a reason why that study stops at fourth grade. Profound and severe language issues are rarer then they used to be yes, but once kids hit the third/4th grade level they start struggling orally and in the mainstream. Also you know that AVT kids tend to have a very high rate of dropping out...and the AVT studies are self reported, which are really inaccurate. If you spoke with the mainstream teachers or the actual kids, you'd find a very different story. I'd love to hear how the AVT brigade would react to the AVTers who are failing high school and have no friends.
Click to expand...
No because the most recent research is showing that vocabulary is becoming a strength for early identified children. You need to update your lit review.

Here is a link about the OCHL study. http://ochlstudy.org/ochl.html
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
Where have I said anything about spoken language being best? I am stating facts about the school for the Deaf that I worked very closely with 2 years ago to help transition one of my 14 year old students to.
Click to expand...
You have said that "parents want the best" That says that YOU think that speech is the best and provides ALL these amazing advantages. And I seriously doubt that you're accurately reporting the truth, unless you're in some strange time warp or alternative universe. I have forwarded this thread to people with 30 plus years of experiences in deaf ed. They all think you are making things up from the perspective of a very biased oral educator. It almost seems like oral educators think that if ALL school time isn't spent speaking/ using HOH style skills then that translates into " They don't use speech and are anti speech and don't wear devices and are hardcore Deaf seperatists. B/c your description of the way your state's Deaf School allegdedly is, sounds exactly like the way oral teachers/experts and even some parents are taught to think of Deaf Schools/ deaf programs.
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
Have you even bothered to look at the site? It is extremely comprehensive.
Click to expand...
Yes, I have, and I know about Beginnings and it's biases. Listen Up (a simlair site) was "comprehensive" but still incredibily audist. Just b/c a site is comprehensive, it doesn't mean it's not biased.
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
No because the most recent research is showing that vocabulary is becoming a strength for early identified children. You need to update your lit review.

Here is a link about the OCHL study. http://ochlstudy.org/ochl.html
Click to expand...
With normal verbal IQs? A typical verbal IQ measures mastery of language. Where are all the dhh kids with normal verbal IQs, who are in typical English classes etc? Is this one of those studies that "studied" very carefully cherry picked students?
 
deafdyke said:
You have said that "parents want the best" That says that YOU think that speech is the best and provides ALL these amazing advantages. And I seriously doubt that you're accurately reporting the truth, unless you're in some strange time warp or alternative universe. I have forwarded this thread to people with 30 plus years of experiences in deaf ed. They all think you are making things up from the perspective of a very biased oral educator. It almost seems like oral educators think that if ALL school time isn't spent speaking/ using HOH style skills then that translates into " They don't use speech and are anti speech and don't wear devices and are hardcore Deaf seperatists. B/c your description of the way your state's Deaf School allegdedly is, sounds exactly like the way oral teachers/experts and even some parents are taught to think of Deaf Schools/ deaf programs.
Click to expand...
Do you not believe that parents want what is best for their child?

I would invite you to investigate some of the Deaf school programs. I don't know why you think I would lie about a school. The school is very proud that they are able to offer 30 minutes a day of speech. They have been actively looking for an audiologist for 3 years now. The problem is that the Deaf school is in a very rural area and people don't want to live there.

I have never once said that one program or methodology is better than another. I have said that I offer one thing, and I do my best to meet the needs of my students. There are other amazing professionals who do other things. I think that is outstanding. I think all children and families should have options, and within those different options they should have access to the best professionals.
 
deafdyke said:
Yes, I have, and I know about Beginnings and it's biases. Listen Up (a simlair site) was "comprehensive" but still incredibily audist. Just b/c a site is comprehensive, it doesn't mean it's not biased.
Click to expand...
I would love to have you point out where you see bias because I am not seeing it. If you would point out specific areas, I think it would help illuminate things for me. Intrinsic bias is difficult to overcome, so I think that it would be really useful for me to look at the site from another person's perspective so I can gain some insight.
 
deafdyke said:
With normal verbal IQs? A typical verbal IQ measures mastery of language. Where are all the dhh kids with normal verbal IQs, who are in typical English classes etc? Is this one of those studies that "studied" very carefully cherry picked students?
Click to expand...
Did you read the study? It clearly states who it is following. How about the LOCHI study out of Australia? https://outcomes.nal.gov.au/index.html They are also following ALL children.
 
Back
Top