The "Mainstreaming" Experience: "Isolated cases"?

TheOracle said:
Good. I'm glad it's settled.

Deaf schools are not always superior.
Mainstream is not always evil.
Kids can have a positive experience in mainstream ed.
Click to expand...

you forgot to add two more -

Mainstream schools are not always superior.
Kids can have a positive experience in deaf ed.
 
GrendelQ said:
I suspect the horror stories apply to good and bad schools. yes, all schools. Which is why -- although they are valid and very unfortunate and action should be taken -- you can't really use those stories to say that sending a child to any deaf school is child abuse, or sending a child to any public school is child abuse.
Click to expand...

it is "child abuse" to me if one is knowingly sending a deaf child to a school that does not sufficiently meet his/her needs. and I'm not talking about mainly his/her educational needs.
 
AlleyCat said:
And this is why threads get locked. Stupid references to Chuck Norris, ass, etc. Cut the crap. Nice job, honey.
Click to expand...

No, threads get locked because *some* people like to make something out of nothing and start stuff.

You're no Mary Poppins.
 
Jiro said:
it is "child abuse" to me if one is knowingly sending a deaf child to a school that does not sufficiently meet his/her needs. and I'm not talking about mainly his/her educational needs.
Click to expand...

Let's put sixty million Americans on trial then. Stop acting like everyone has choices to put their kids in a dream educational environment.

You and AlleyCat are fighting for the sake of fighting.
 
Jiro said:
it is "child abuse" to me if one is knowingly sending a deaf child to a school that does not sufficiently meet his/her needs. and I'm not talking about mainly his/her educational needs.
Click to expand...

Sadly, I think most parents know they are sending their children -- hearing or not -- to schools that don't meet all needs. I'm so very grateful that we've found a school that happens to be an amazing fit for my daughter's very particular situation. there are still elements it doesn't offer, but I know of no other that would provide more of what she needs.
 
TheOracle said:
Let's put sixty million Americans on trial then. Stop acting like everyone has choices to put their kids in a dream educational environment.

You and AlleyCat are fighting for the sake of fighting.
Click to expand...

and you're not? :confused:
 
Many kids fare well academically in the mainstreamed more than the deaf school because the curriculum is watered down and instruction is so heavily modified that it barely resembles the original materials. And the deaf schools don't fare well because they don't usually accept kids who are on grade-level.

More importantly, we are expressing concerns of the overall well-being of children, especially emotional and mental health. I had a 4.0 gpa -with NO modifications whatsoever and I was reading above grade level- when I finally broke down and dropped out of school.

The mainstreamed education setting was cruel. Lonely. Painful. And my story isn't even unique. How many more were like me?
Click to expand...
Exactly. Were they talking about the kids who are in the mainstream and on par? Like the ones who actually thrive with minimal accomondations and take foriegn languages and aren't even in the Resource Room?
There are quite a few kids like that yes.....but then again, even a lot of kids in the mainstream are faced with majorly watered down curriculm and expectations. Like they might be in the Resource Room/sped for English or whatever. They may do OK, but still., you're talking about a really broad population.
And yes, bajagirl, you are SO right.
The Oracle, I think sometimes a solotaire educational placement can be amazing. What we are railing against is the kneejerk assumption that a solotaire educational placement is good for EVERYONE.
 
dd, dear, I'm just rallying against the kneejerk reaction against mainstreaming = always being bad. :)

That's it. I've said time and time again...ASL is not negotiable. English is not negotiable. Every child needs language from the get-go.

also, as a mainstream teacher (ESL or not), I'm not always comfortable with some of my IEP kiddos. it's not fair to them. i can't always meet their real needs. *sigh* (i'm talking cognitive, though.)

if my son were deaf i'd have to evaluate his current placement against a deaf school. i'd keep him at his current school if i could, because he's getting a jewish education, a hebrew education, and he's with his friends. it doesn't make me a monster...it just shows that i take it case by case and focus on the goals. :)
 
TheOracle said:
dd, dear, I'm just rallying against the kneejerk reaction against mainstreaming = always being bad. :)

That's it. I've said time and time again...ASL is not negotiable. English is not negotiable. Every child needs language from the get-go.

also, as a mainstream teacher (ESL or not), I'm not always comfortable with some of my IEP kiddos. it's not fair to them. i can't always meet their real needs. *sigh* (i'm talking cognitive, though.)
Click to expand...

where did we say that? :dunno:
 
hat sending a child to any deaf school is child abuse, or sending a child to any public school is child abuse.
Click to expand...
But Grendel, we're not talking about deaf school vs public school. I think almost everyone in the thread is railing not against public schools, but rather against a solotaire placement. Some public schools actually do have some pretty decent formal Dhh ed programs.
Sadly, I think most parents know they are sending their children -- hearing or not -- to schools that don't meet all needs.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, I do think that a lot of parents of oral only kids almost seem to think that a mainstream education will automaticly let their kids "sit at the front of the bus." Sadly, too many kids end up riding at the back of the bus educationally and socially when they are mainstreamed.
 
I think almost everyone in the thread is railing not against public schools, but rather against a solotaire placement.
Click to expand...
And just to clarify even further......I think that a solotaire placement CAN be a good placement. But it should be VERY VERY CAREFULLY undertaken, and not practiced as a universal "one size fits all" placement.
 
TheOracle said:
dd, dear, I'm just rallying against the kneejerk reaction against mainstreaming = always being bad. :)

That's it. I've said time and time again...ASL is not negotiable. English is not negotiable. Every child needs language from the get-go.

also, as a mainstream teacher (ESL or not), I'm not always comfortable with some of my IEP kiddos. it's not fair to them. i can't always meet their real needs. *sigh* (i'm talking cognitive, though.)

if my son were deaf i'd have to evaluate his current placement against a deaf school. i'd keep him at his current school if i could, because he's getting a jewish education, a hebrew education, and he's with his friends. it doesn't make me a monster...it just shows that i take it case by case and focus on the goals. :)
Click to expand...


Mainstreaming isn't bad if there's support services that meet the deaf kid's needs. I'm afraid that that hasn't been the case for many of us who were mainstreamed.
 
Deaf adults who are self-sufficient, well-educated, and intelligent on this forum are saying that mainstreamed education isn't as great as it sounds on paper. They personally have worn the shoes of a deaf child in the system.

Deaf teenagers who are sitting in my classroom, day in and out, have written in their daily journals about their experiences from public schools. I cry every time I read them. I suppose one day I will get used to it, but I'm not at that point.

I am not saying that every single child who is in a mainstreamed setting is being "abused." What I am saying is that some of the experiences that children who are often placed in the mainstreamed education setting is often abuse, but it's not often seen as it. I've pointed out some examples. Many things which are common and accepted for deaf children in those settings should not be. For example, has it occurred to you that having a closed-captioned television program may not always be appropriate? Hearing kids in first grade do not read that well yet - so they learn by hearing the language. Yet, it's a common accommodation for first grade deaf kids, who probably don't have nearly as much exposure to English words, to have captioned on the media program so the interpreter will not interpret the program. This is wrong. I've sat at plenty of meetings whereas I voiced and advocated for the child to be placed in a public school setting as it was more appropriate than the deaf school (for various reasons, and for every child, those reasons will and should vary). What I am merely pointing out is that even in the best possible mainstreamed setting with the appropriate modifications, accommodations, and instructional goals (which does not happen often, by the way), the child still will have some negative experiences that can adversely affect their emotional and mental well-being. This is something that is often overlooked, ignored, or simply said with a shrug "Well, we can't have everything." Parents often feel judged or defensive when they hear these stories, which is understandable. But it's also something they need to sit back and listen to. By listening to these "blanket statements", they may realize the potential of making sure the same thing doesn't happen to their children. For example, it's not okay for the child to sit and eat lunch without an interpreter...this is a very common practice. The child needs conversational skills, too. He needs informal language exposure as opposed to only interpreting what the teacher says. By listening to the stories, the parents can look at their own children and perhaps make better adjustments. I wish someone talked to my parents.


If one chooses to call the experiences of deaf adults who are self-sufficient, well-educated, and intelligent on this forum as blanket statements in regard to mainstreamed, then so be it. Let's hang the blanket on our clothesline and show it off. Someone has to speak up for these children. I bet you that many of the deaf adults on this forum share my sentiments when I say that I wish someone spoke up for me.
 
deafskeptic said:
Mainstreaming isn't bad if there's support services that meet the deaf kid's needs. I'm afraid that that hasn't been the case for many of us who were mainstreamed.
Click to expand...

Completely agree with you and with DD on these points. Even though I go on and on about how much I love my child's deaf school, I think that in a different place or if her needs were different we might find that a particular mainstream environment could actually meet her needs as well. I know our local school, and both they and we agree that my child is better served where she is, that they couldn't provide sufficient services. I wish all schools were as forthcoming about that if there were better alternatives within reach of the child. Sometimes you have to make that case for them -- you know your child's needs far better than a school -- and sometimes there are no better alternatives within reach and you have to fight to create suitable services within your local school.
 
deafbajagal said:
Deaf adults who are self-sufficient, well-educated, and intelligent on this forum are saying that mainstreamed education isn't as great as it sounds on paper. They personally have worn the shoes of a deaf child in the system.

Deaf teenagers who are sitting in my classroom, day in and out, have written in their daily journals about their experiences from public schools. I cry every time I read them. I suppose one day I will get used to it, but I'm not at that point.

I am not saying that every single child who is in a mainstreamed setting is being "abused." What I am saying is that some of the experiences that children who are often placed in the mainstreamed education setting is often abuse, but it's not often seen as it. I've pointed out some examples. Many things which are common and accepted for deaf children in those settings should not be. For example, has it occurred to you that having a closed-captioned television program may not always be appropriate? Hearing kids in first grade do not read that well yet - so they learn by hearing the language. Yet, it's a common accommodation for first grade deaf kids, who probably don't have nearly as much exposure to English words, to have captioned on the media program so the interpreter will not interpret the program. This is wrong. I've sat at plenty of meetings whereas I voiced and advocated for the child to be placed in a public school setting as it was more appropriate than the deaf school (for various reasons, and for every child, those reasons will and should vary). What I am merely pointing out is that even in the best possible mainstreamed setting with the appropriate modifications, accommodations, and instructional goals (which does not happen often, by the way), the child still will have some negative experiences that can adversely affect their emotional and mental well-being. This is something that is often overlooked, ignored, or simply said with a shrug "Well, we can't have everything." Parents often feel judged or defensive when they hear these stories, which is understandable. But it's also something they need to sit back and listen to. By listening to these "blanket statements", they may realize the potential of making sure the same thing doesn't happen to their children. For example, it's not okay for the child to sit and eat lunch without an interpreter...this is a very common practice. The child needs conversational skills, too. He needs informal language exposure as opposed to only interpreting what the teacher says. By listening to the stories, the parents can look at their own children and perhaps make better adjustments. I wish someone talked to my parents.


If one chooses to call the experiences of deaf adults who are self-sufficient, well-educated, and intelligent on this forum as blanket statements in regard to mainstreamed, then so be it. Let's hang the blanket on our clothesline and show it off. Someone has to speak up for these children. I bet you that many of the deaf adults on this forum share my sentiments when I say that I wish someone spoke up for me.
Click to expand...


That was a very poignant piece you wrote. I am not advocating mainstream. I am saying that for some parents, mainstream is the only option. What I would like to see (and the reason im so interested in this thread) is what the problems are and what we can do to address them. I think its a useful conversation to have. Why? Because I am a force to br reckoned with when it comes to giving kids an even playing field. But in order for me to be the advocate I think I am, I need to be realistic and positive.

I am tired of defending myself every day because I have hearing. Sometimes I want to reach through the computer and smack people and yell, "Oh yeah? You don't know shit because you're Deaf!" Come on. We all have brains. :)

I come from a background in which everything is to be questioned. I question everything I believe in and I encourage my students to do the same.

With the way I see education going these days, mainstream will be the norm. If that's the case, then I want to take these " isolated" cases and multiply them by ten thousand fold.
 
GrendelQ said:
Completely agree with you and with DD on these points. Even though I go on and on about how much I love my child's deaf school, I think that in a different place or if her needs were different we might find that a particular mainstream environment could actually meet her needs as well. I know our local school, and both they and we agree that my child is better served where she is, that they couldn't provide sufficient services. I wish all schools were as forthcoming about that if there were better alternatives within reach of the child. Sometimes you have to make that case for them -- you know your child's needs far better than a school -- and sometimes there are no better alternatives within reach and you have to fight to create suitable services within your local school.
Click to expand...

Your point about limited options and making the best of the situation is a good one. We are about 2 hours away from the School for the Deaf, but even if we were right next door it wouldn't be appropriate for my son. That's why I've fought for him to get appropriate accomodations. He doesn't have any peers who sign, so I've gone into his class to teach the other students. The way I look at it, if there isn't an established group of individuals who sign then I will bring it to them.

It's not perfect, but it's what we have to work with. I think if the Schools for the Deaf focused on ways to make it more appropriate for the HH students, enrollment would go up and so many of these schools wouldn't be closing.

It's imperative to have schools that are ASL based, but at the same time they should be looking at ways to make spoken language in conjunction with sign available for the students who have residual hearing and are also learning English.

For me, I think having a magnet program would be most beneficial for all parties involved. I get tired of explaining the implications of a hearing loss over and over to those who have already been "educated" about it. If there were an established location of teachers/ staff who were knowledgeable and understanding of what it means our students would be in a better position.

Parents like me wouldn't have to worry about what goes on at school when we're not around. Unfortunately, I worry every day.
 
Back
Top