You just said that you think that oral only is the best. You're not giving any evidence that it's the best. You are simply saying that its the best...and yes, there's the evidence. Youre not even keeping track of what you're even saying or claiming!!?! There are also a LOT of holes in your theories... you claim to be very experienced and to have even known the first generation of implantees...Yet you didn't even know who the Chaikofs were. That's fishy. Very fishy. Oh and if the kids there were all unaided and unimplanted (which really does go against current trends as most kids, even kids who sign and attend deaf schools, use devices) why would they even NEED an audilogist or speech therapy? There's a lot of holes there my dear. And yes, I do think that you would lie about a Deaf School b/c what you're claiming just sounds like the eternal same old myths that AG Bell has claimed about Deaf Schools since time immoral. I remember when parents like you were claiming that ANY program that uses sign neglects speech.... I actually visited a lot of Deaf Schools and programs that use sign, and I was MINDBLOWN at how oral the kids were. They wore aids and CIs......and they were BILINGAL. Get over it "Dawn" Just b/c you may have had a bad experience with a particular poorly funded deaf school, it does NOT mean that ALL Schools or programs for the Deaf are like that.....and it also doesn't mean that the mainstream is automaticly any better either.
Where's the information about deaf teens? You do realize that it's somewhat rare to have profound language delays, but mild delays may not show up until the child is a teen and starts dealing with much more advanced work, vocabulary and curriclum.
I absolutely never said that one way was better. I said that I support parents because parents know their children and want what is best for them. Please go back and read what I wrote because you misunderstood.
I also never said that all the students at Deaf schools were not wearing devices. I said that I worked very closely with my state school for the Deaf two years ago to transition one of my older students to their program. I said that they offer 30 minutes of speech a day but that they are still looking for an audiologist after three years. Our state school is very well funded. They have large grounds, a vocational training program that the local schools beg to be a part of, and they even have the funds to pay for families to live close by if their child needs to attend the school because it is cheaper than trying to transport them to see their family on the weekends.
Where is that research? I have seen a great deal of literature that discusses the reading comprehension issues that would appear around third grade but I haven't seen anything about students who did well through middle school and then suddenly fall behind. Both of the studies that I showed you go through fourth grade. There is also a study of Auditory Verbal Therapy graduates that just finished its 25th year.
Um yes you did. You said that a speech therapist/audi wouldn't be useful b/c none of the kids use devices. You keep contradicting yourself sweetie. And relocation funds? Yeah right. Your state's school must be incredibily well funded. Where's the cite/evidence for that?
Quote where I said that because it simply did not happen. In fact, I said the opposite. They do not have an audiologist, but obviously they have several SLPs because they have speech for up to 30 minutes a day per child. I said that I helped transfer a student who uses bilateral cochlear implants, but she is only wearing one now. The school has a budget of $6.5 million and serves between 70 and 80 students, depending on the year.
You stated it, in your initial post about the school. I have a feeling you most likely edited it to play some games. We are very familair with your type here.....and we actually do have REAL TODs, and people with 30 years of experience with deaf ed, dhh kids who have posted here. And they have several SLPs but no audi? Yeah right "Dawn" Your description of the school is just incredibily fishy and made up. You make it sound like it's Is this the same school that you claimed didn't provide speech to your daughter and you completely flipped out b/c the teacher refused to conduct speech therapy in a total communication method? So in your mind that meant that NO deaf schools provided HOH style services. I see what you're doing, playing with the facts. Why do I get the vibe that if I spoke with another TOD in your state, they would give me a much clearer picture of Deaf ed in your state?
Did she say Illinois? I thought she was in Missouri.
I don't have children who have needed speech therapy. I have a two year old daughter named Alexandra, we call her Alex for short and a 6 month old named Percy.
This is the sort of thing that itinerant teachers of the deaf work against. I have made sure that districts understand that speech therapy for a student with a hearing loss is not the same as a student with a fluency issue and that students shouldn't be grouped for convenience. If a student with hearing loss is ever in group speech therapy there should be a very good reason.
The only reason we group together was to save time and $$$ . I am glad to hear something is being done about grouping students together for speech therapy , you really it to be one on one to help the child .
Several years? Again yeah right. You claim to be close friends with the first generation of implantees, but you've only been working for several years? And HOH style services are basicly oral deaf services...like the type of educational intervention that they would get at an oral school or a formal oral sizable program. After all, oral deaf kids of today function as HOH.
Agreed. A one room schoolhouse approach with speech therapy doesn't work.
http://msd.dese.mo.gov/resource-center/audiology.html Well, you are right. But somehow they still get audilogy services to the students. So the students aren't lacking with device usage.
What are you even talking about? I said I am personally friends with several early implanted people. Meaning that they are my age and I socially associate with them, not that I worked with them as a professional.