Why can't we have Deaf Ed like this in the US?

deafbajagal said:
I'm sorry but oral training will never be deaf friendly any more than me being spider-friendly. Lol
Click to expand...

*snort* Very true. But on the other hand.......instead of making it all boring and speech therapy-ish, somehow make it FUN. Like the way kids in English As a Second Language classes learn spoken English. Like it wouldn't be CID/Clarke/St.Jospeh's with Grizelda Fothergil as the speech therapist.
It would not be mandatory at all....but it would be available for those who wanted it.
 
deafdyke said:
*snort* Very true. But on the other hand.......instead of making it all boring and speech therapy-ish, somehow make it FUN. Like the way kids in English As a Second Language classes learn spoken English. Like it wouldn't be CID/Clarke/St.Jospeh's with Grizelda Fothergil as the speech therapist.
It would not be mandatory at all....but it would be available for those who wanted it.
Click to expand...

what...the....fuck...
so you actually support oralism????!!! make up your bloody mind
 
Grummer said:
what...the....fuck...
so you actually support oralism????!!! make up your bloody mind
Click to expand...

No I do not. I simply believe that speech services can be provided in a bi bi friendly manner. I disagree strongly with pure oralism, and think that the gross majority of parents who opt for oral only still haven't come to terms with their grief over having a kid who is "different"
 
deafbajagal said:
Personally, I wish deaf education would eliminate teaching spoken language skills altogether. Speech is overrated and deaf people, no matter how hard they try, will never fully master it. Believe me, I've worked so fucking hard to have speech like hearing people...and what so I get? "Are you German...you have an accent.". I get to hear my four year old kid correct me on punctuation and articulation. I become more self-conscious and always feel I'm never good enough. I do believe in exposure to spoken language to use speech reading skills and cue speech to learn the visual representation of morphomes and all that...but only for literacy purposes. Deaf Education needs to get brass balls and really start realizing that deaf kids can and will master English if they are fluent in American Sign Language (or the deaf language of their country such as Auslan). If teachers are fully trained in bi-bi methods (many are not). If they would start the kids at the deaf school from the beginning instead of mainstreaming them only for them to fail and end up at the deaf schools with major gaps and delays. If they would eliminate the stupid and irrelevant requirements of NCLB. And if they would develop appropriate assessments for deaf/hh kids. And if they would provide parents with the support tey need in order to be advocates for their children.
Click to expand...

I am confused...you say that but in the other thread that you created, you said you wanted to start a comprehensive auditory training program at where you work.
 
deafbajagal said:
Auditory training has nothing to do with speech.
Click to expand...

So you want the kids to learn to "hear" with their implants in the classroom? I am trying to understand what you mean by that.
 
Kids with moderate to severe loss should be able to discriminate between a siren of an ambulance and a country ballad. If they are going to make kids wear CIs or aids...at least support it by providing tools to benefit from them as much as possible...otherwise it's all mumble jumble.
 
Buffalo said:
Exactly! That's why my oral elementary school was few grades behind. If the child don't understand, then use easier words - so on until the education became real bad.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly! The only reason why kids are "doing better" is that they're not so severely behind that they need private oral schools like Clarke/CID etc, but can benifit more from the public school oral programs. And I mean now with kids who hit the fourth grade ceiling, they're now heading off to their state Deaf school, rather then to Clarke or CID or whatever.
 
deafdyke said:
Which is that most dhh kids approach English As A Second Language right?
Click to expand...

No. I'm talking about the ways a deaf child processes information. If we address things from that perspective, we would not constantly be trying to remediate the delays that are caused by not addressing things from that perspective.
 
deafbajagal said:
Kids with moderate to severe loss should be able to discriminate between a siren of an ambulance and a country ballad. If they are going to make kids wear CIs or aids...at least support it by providing tools to benefit from them as much as possible...otherwise it's all mumble jumble.
Click to expand...

Oh i see...ok thanks for clearing it up.
 
deafbajagal said:
Kids with moderate to severe loss should be able to discriminate between a siren of an ambulance and a country ballad. If they are going to make kids wear CIs or aids...at least support it by providing tools to benefit from them as much as possible...otherwise it's all mumble jumble.
Click to expand...

I am going to have to disagree with this. The dB and the Hz level at which a child is able to perceive sound with a device or without says virtually nothing about the brain's ability to take that input and process it into something meaningful. That is what discrimination is all about. And that is why some people in a moderate to severe range are able to discriminate speech very well, while others can't.

Parents, especially, make a huge mistake in equating perception with actual hearing. Hearing involves processing what has been perceived into a meaningful bit of information.
 
If I ever say I support oral education, you make me come to you in MD so you can whoop my ass. :)
 
jillio said:
I am going to have to disagree with this. The dB and the Hz level at which a child is able to perceive sound with a device or without says virtually nothing about the brain's ability to take that input and process it into something meaningful. That is what discrimination is all about. And that is why some people in a moderate to severe range are able to discriminate speech very well, while others can't.

Parents, especially, make a huge mistake in equating perception with actual hearing. Hearing involves processing what has been perceived into a meaningful bit of information.
Click to expand...

Actually, you're right. Thanks for the correction. Yet without auditory training, we'll never know what that child can do. Each kid is wired differently.
 
deafbajagal said:
Actually, you're right. Thanks for the correction. Yet without auditory training, we'll never know what that child can do. Each kid is wired differently.
Click to expand...

NP

Well, there is auditory training, and then there is auditory training, if you get my meaning.

Each kid is wired differently, to be sure, but I think it is dangerous to predict a child's future abilities and successes based on how well they can hear.
 
jillio said:
NP

Well, there is auditory training, and then there is auditory training, if you get my meaning.

Each kid is wired differently, to be sure, but I think it is dangerous to predict a child's future abilities and successes based on how well they can hear.
Click to expand...

Agreed! There's boring ass intensive auditory training ala that you would have seen at CID/Clarke etc and then there's auditory training provided as a supplemental service.
 
jillio said:
I am going to have to disagree with this. The dB and the Hz level at which a child is able to perceive sound with a device or without says virtually nothing about the brain's ability to take that input and process it into something meaningful. That is what discrimination is all about. And that is why some people in a moderate to severe range are able to discriminate speech very well, while others can't.

Parents, especially, make a huge mistake in equating perception with actual hearing. Hearing involves processing what has been perceived into a meaningful bit of information.
Click to expand...

As the difference between identifying the sounds and comprehesion of words.
 
jillio said:
Exactly.
Click to expand...

Years ago, I read an article about this old man who lost some hearing. He said that the first thing to go when you lose some hearing is comprehension. That really does make sense because I can identify many sounds but have hard time understand what was being said without lipreading.
 
Back
Top