Originally Posted by CreatedNat
I think it is an interesting aspect for the conference, and I do think that being able to have intelligible speech is a wonderful thing, something that can help create a brighter future for a child. But from my understanding (please correct me if I am wrong) but Clark school is a purely Oral Environment, and does not allow for ASL. I think ASL is a vital to a deaf child, their linguistic development, as well as their development of fluent English.
That's true, I think Csign was kindly redirecting deafdyke to look further into what the Clarke program is all about before she (DD) continues to inform people that bi-bi schools for the deaf provide "Clarke-style" auditory-oral programming and intense speech therapy for the majority of students, neither of which is the case. My little one has attended a bi-bi school for 4, nearly 5 years, and I've researched schools pretty extensively in the course of making that decision (and making a case for it each year): a bi-bi school where ASL is the primary language of instruction and interaction is a significantly different educational environment compared to Clarke's programs.