NYT: Among Twists in Budget Woes, Tensions Over Teaching the Deaf

[GrendelQ]

Some broad exposure for the debates around educational settings for deaf children:

Among Twists in Budget Woes, Tensions Over Teaching the Deaf

The New York Times
By MONICA DAVEY
Published: July 26, 2011
The appointments of new board members for the Indiana School for the Deaf has reignited a debate over how deaf people should be educated.

(I hope this isn't duplicating another post, I hadn't seen it mentioned here here yet).

 

[CSign]

I didn't understand the part where they said they want kids whose family chooses "listening and Speaking" to have the same access to a FAPE. Um, mainstreaming
Which is already available.

It always bothers me when people say they want what other parents want. Thank you, but I have no interest in the "listening and speaking" approach. I like to utilize it all, not force my HH child to rely solely upon his auditory input.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Does anyone have statistics that show which approach is cheaper to implement? That might be an interesting twist to this discussion. Off the top of my head, I would think that the Bi-Bi approach would be much less expensive than oral only, but is it?

Here's what I'm considering:

amplification: HA's aren't always covered by insurance; even for children. Cochlear implants; same thing. Although, the CI may be covered more easily than an HA would be.

sign language classes: Could be expensive if we're talking a family environment here. If you factor in that the majority of deaf kids are born to hearing parents, the cost of teaching a family sign language could be expensive.

Educational: Getting appropriate accomodations for each group of children. Which is cheaper? Terps (if the child is mainstreamed). Hiring ASL fluent teachers if the kid is in an BiBi environment. Other accomodations such as sound fields for the classrooms, FM systems, notetakers. On and on....

 

[deafdyke]

Does anyone have statistics that show which approach is cheaper to implement? That might be an interesting twist to this discussion. Off the top of my head, I would think that the Bi-Bi approach would be much less expensive than oral only, but is it?

Here's what I'm considering:

amplification: HA's aren't always covered by insurance; even for children. Cochlear implants; same thing. Although, the CI may be covered more easily than an HA would be.

sign language classes: Could be expensive if we're talking a family environment here. If you factor in that the majority of deaf kids are born to hearing parents, the cost of teaching a family sign language could be expensive.

Educational: Getting appropriate accomodations for each group of children. Which is cheaper? Terps (if the child is mainstreamed). Hiring ASL fluent teachers if the kid is in an BiBi environment. Other accomodations such as sound fields for the classrooms, FM systems, notetakers. On and on....

Actually I think that the ONLY "reason" why oral only appears to be cheaper is if you give a kid a minimal accomondations hoh triad of speech therapy, preferential seating and FM device. Things like remedial education etc cost a lot more.
And the thing is, we're forgetting that a lot of the mainstreamed kids, may be attending formal sizable programs. Ie mainstreamed, but not solotaired. And the thing is, parents are unaware that schools for the Deaf are a viable option. I can pretty much guarentee that if a lot of those Hear Indiana parents knew that hoh and CI kids were accepted at Deaf School, and ALL they needed was to learn ASL, the enrollment at Indy would be BOOMING! I really think most of the AG Bell parents are sorely sorely misinformed. Look at all the parents here who were told to solotaire their kids. Then they transferred their kids to Dhh program or Deaf School, and they can't stop raving about them.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Actually I think that the ONLY "reason" why oral only appears to be cheaper is if you give a kid a minimal accomondations hoh triad of speech therapy, preferential seating and FM device. Things like remedial education etc cost a lot more.
And the thing is, we're forgetting that a lot of the mainstreamed kids, may be attending formal sizable programs. Ie mainstreamed, but not solotaired. And the thing is, parents are unaware that schools for the Deaf are a viable option. I can pretty much guarentee that if a lot of those Hear Indiana parents knew that hoh and CI kids were accepted at Deaf School, and ALL they needed was to learn ASL, the enrollment at Indy would be BOOMING! I really think most of the AG Bell parents are sorely sorely misinformed. Look at all the parents here who were told to solotaire their kids. Then they transferred their kids to Dhh program or Deaf School, and they can't stop raving about them.

That wasn't what I was implying or asking... I actually think the BiBi approach would be the less expensive option, but I wanted to hear what others think.