Charter school vs. state deaf school

[deafdyke]

Exposure to a language is not speech therapy.

Plus, if a child is a sign language user, when they leave schol, they will still be using sign. Are you advocating a family with a child who uses ASL, NOT use it at home, so that they will learn spoken language?

Yes I know. However, Auditory-Verbal folks seem to think that if a kid doesn't have speech therapy 24/7 (b/c that's what A-V is.....constant speech therapy) they won't aquire a language.
Kids can just pick up a language.
And, no I don't advocate not using ASL at all. I support speech therapy as an option.........I just don't approve of speech therapy 24/7. Kids can and do easily pick up stuff without being formally taught you know.
Heck, my best friend was unschooled for 17 years and she's one of the smartest people I know.

 

[faire_jour]

Yes I know. However, Auditory-Verbal folks seem to think that if a kid doesn't have speech therapy 24/7 (b/c that's what A-V is.....constant speech therapy) they won't aquire a language.
Kids can just pick up a language.
And, no I don't advocate not using ASL at all. I support speech therapy as an option.........I just don't approve of speech therapy 24/7. Kids can and do easily pick up stuff without being formally taught you know.
Heck, my best friend was unschooled for 17 years and she's one of the smartest people I know.

We don't do AV (obviously) but I don't think it is therapy 24-7 either. It is just about always imputing language. For example, say you are walking down the street with your 2 year old and you see a dog. An AV parent would take the opportunity to say something like this:

"Look a dog! Do you see the dog? The dog is brown. He is a big dog. That dog is a collie. Oh, I hear the dog. Did you hear him? That dog said woof-woof. Can you say woof-woof?"

I don't think there is anything unhealthy about that.

 

[jillio]

We don't do AV (obviously) but I don't think it is therapy 24-7 either. It is just about always imputing language. For example, say you are walking down the street with your 2 year old and you see a dog. An AV parent would take the opportunity to say something like this:

"Look a dog! Do you see the dog? The dog is brown. He is a big dog. That dog is a collie. Oh, I hear the dog. Did you hear him? That dog said woof-woof. Can you say woof-woof?"

I don't think there is anything unhealthy about that.

Signing parents carry on the same type of conversation with their deaf child. Conversing with your child about their world is not something unique to AV parents.

 

[faire_jour]

Signing parents carry on the same type of conversation with their deaf child. Conversing with your child about their world is not something unique to AV parents.

I completely agree. I am saying that this kind of communication is NOT therapy 24-7.

 

[deafdyke]

Well yeah it's not "boo-be-bah" speech therapy....and I think you could probaly apply AV practices, in a reasonable manner so that it's not like the parent is a surrogate therapist. But it's also very helicopter parent/high achiver family friendly.
It's along the lines of the parents who buy their kids toys that will increase their SAT skills.Or the ones who HAVE to get their kids into the "right" preschool....or those parents who enroll wittle Smashlie in Kumon or those other types of "academic cram" "enrichment" programs.
Personally I find AVT insulting.....it assumes that dhh kids who get oral training aren't smart enough to "pick up" language and apply it in the real world.
I think SOME AV therapy (in a therapy sense) is a good thing....but AVT as a lifestyle just seems to be going totally overboard!

 

[jillio]

Well yeah it's not "boo-be-bah" speech therapy....and I think you could probaly apply AV practices, in a reasonable manner so that it's not like the parent is a surrogate therapist. But it's also very helicopter parent/high achiver family friendly.
It's along the lines of the parents who buy their kids toys that will increase their SAT skills.Or the ones who HAVE to get their kids into the "right" preschool....or those parents who enroll wittle Smashlie in Kumon or those other types of "academic cram" "enrichment" programs.
Personally I find AVT insulting.....it assumes that dhh kids who get oral training aren't smart enough to "pick up" language and apply it in the real world.
I think SOME AV therapy (in a therapy sense) is a good thing....but AVT as a lifestyle just seems to be going totally overboard!

I tend to agree with you, deafdyke. AV, even in the form described, is very directive. A child cannot tolerate a directive linguistic atmosphere on a constant basis. A child needs time for passive acquisition of information, as well. It is necessary for them to internalize concepts so that they are useful and meaninful.

 

[faire_jour]

Well yeah it's not "boo-be-bah" speech therapy....and I think you could probaly apply AV practices, in a reasonable manner so that it's not like the parent is a surrogate therapist. But it's also very helicopter parent/high achiver family friendly.
It's along the lines of the parents who buy their kids toys that will increase their SAT skills.Or the ones who HAVE to get their kids into the "right" preschool....or those parents who enroll wittle Smashlie in Kumon or those other types of "academic cram" "enrichment" programs.
Personally I find AVT insulting.....it assumes that dhh kids who get oral training aren't smart enough to "pick up" language and apply it in the real world.
I think SOME AV therapy (in a therapy sense) is a good thing....but AVT as a lifestyle just seems to be going totally overboard!

You seem to have a real problem with parents with money, or even highly involved parent. The number one factor that determines success in school for children is parent involvement. With SO MANY parents being uninvolved, uncaring, and absent, why do you choose to deride those that care enough to be there, encouraging their children???

 

[jillio]

You seem to have a real problem with parents with money, or even highly involved parent. The number one factor that determines success in school for children is parent involvement. With SO MANY parents being uninvolved, uncaring, and absent, why do you choose to deride those that care enough to be there, encouraging their children???

There is a difference between "involved" and "controlling".

 

[Oddball]

There is a difference between "involved" and "controlling".

bingo.

I have seen some parents controlling their Deaf children's lives, making decisions for them without consulting with them first. How sad.

 

[faire_jour]

bingo.

I have seen some parents controlling their Deaf children's lives, making decisions for them without consulting with them first. How sad.

How are you supposed to ask a baby or toddler or even young child, for their imput regarding a important decsion like language choices or amplification?

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

How are you supposed to ask a baby or toddler or even young child, for their imput regarding a important decsion like language choices or amplification?

Irrelevant.

She meant parents that send their kids to cram schools, check to make sure that their kids' homework are 100% right before going to bed, then make their kids rewrite if it's not... and so on.'

Problem is that having a deaf child or blind child often lead to most parents to doing those things since they feel they need to do everything for their kids.

 

[sallylou]

I highly recommend Parenting with Love and Logic. Dr. Fay is great.

Love and Logic - Helping Parents and Teachers Raise Responsible Kids

The danger in controlling parenting is that the child will not learn to make decisions for himself. A child needs to learn to accept responsibility for his own behavior. Let a child experience logical consequences early on. As a child grows, he becomes more confident about making his own decisions.

I've gotten some great ideas and techniques from Dr. Fay's lectures.

 

[jillio]

How are you supposed to ask a baby or toddler or even young child, for their imput regarding a important decsion like language choices or amplification?

While that type of controlling certainly can and does happen, the type of controlling I was referring to that parents often mislabel as "involved" is much more covert.

 

[jillio]

Irrelevant.

She meant parents that send their kids to cram schools, check to make sure that their kids' homework are 100% right before going to bed, then make their kids rewrite if it's not... and so on.'

Problem is that having a deaf child or blind child often lead to most parents to doing those things since they feel they need to do everything for their kids.

Your last statement is very true, souggy, and is the example of the covert type of controlling I was referring to. To make themselves feel better, and to compensate in some way for their child's deafness or blindness, they are so controlling as to never allow that child to develop a sense of independence and capability. Rarely is this for the benefit if the child, and frequently simply to make the parent feel better.

 

[jillio]

I highly recommend Parenting with Love and Logic. Dr. Fay is great.

Love and Logic - Helping Parents and Teachers Raise Responsible Kids

The danger in controlling parenting is that the child will not learn to make decisions for himself. A child needs to learn to accept responsibility for his own behavior. Let a child experience logical consequences early on. As a child grows, he becomes more confident about making his own decisions.

I've gotten some great ideas and techniques from Dr. Fay's lectures.

Agreed. Dr. Fay has excellent points.

 

[deafdyke]

You seem to have a real problem with parents with money, or even highly involved parent. The number one factor that determines success in school for children is parent involvement. With SO MANY parents being uninvolved, uncaring, and absent, why do you choose to deride those that care enough to be there, encouraging their children???

faire_jour......jillo and souggy are right. You misunderstand,
I have nothing against wealthy parents or parents who are involved with their kids.
What I am against are hyperinvolved helicopter parents who are into parenting as a "status" thing.........You know....they have to raise "perfect" overacheiver kids who will go to Name Brand University and be a standout in all their extracurricular activities.
This sort of thing is seen quite a bit in very wealthy families and towns (and i should know.....seeing as I live in a wealthy suburb with a prep school and have many friends from "wealthy prep school" suburbs) It's NOT exclusive to wealthy families (lots of middle class families are into that mentality too....gotta get the Latest "edge" so wittle Smashlie can go to Harvard)

 

[shel90]

You seem to have a real problem with parents with money, or even highly involved parent. The number one factor that determines success in school for children is parent involvement. With SO MANY parents being uninvolved, uncaring, and absent, why do you choose to deride those that care enough to be there, encouraging their children???

She is talking about those who wont accept less than perfect children or are all about the "perfect" image. I have friends who had parents like them. Their parents refused to accept their deafness and controlled every aspect of their lives. They arent highly involved for the children's sake.

 

[Lighthouse77]

The whole point of schools is EDUCATION not speech therapy.

To guarantee that all deaf/hoh children are getting equal access, ASL is the language to use. To use spoken language u run the risk of children not having full access. They ARE deaf, not hearing.

I agree, if you are deaf, you are not going to get that 35 hours access anyway. You are more likely to get spoken speech from one and one conversation (especially speech therapy)

So a teacher teaching in front of the class, more likely these deaf with hearing aids/cochlear implant will just ignore the mumbling and nonsense stuffs. You know, goes in one ear and out to the other.

But who says teachers are not allow to speak anyway? I thought hearing teachers of the deaf will speak anyway as they sign. And interpreters don't speak because someone is already speaking. So it is not like deaf people are not getting their share of spoken languages. Unless you mean deaf people need 35 hours of lipreading?

 

[shel90]

I agree, if you are deaf, you are not going to get that 35 hours access anyway. You are more likely to get spoken speech from one and one conversation (especially speech therapy)

So a teacher teaching in front of the class, more likely these deaf with hearing aids/cochlear implant will just ignore the mumbling and nonsense stuffs. You know, goes in one ear and out to the other.

But who says teachers are not allow to speak anyway? I thought hearing teachers of the deaf will speak anyway as they sign. And interpreters don't speak because someone is already speaking. So it is not like deaf people are not getting their share of spoken languages. Unless you mean deaf people need 35 hours of lipreading?

Not all hearing teachers of deaf children speak while signing. Also, there are teachers who are deaf too. In the BiBi programs, Sim-Com is not allowed as it gives the children a distorted model of both languages. If one is going to speak, dont sign and vice versa.

Lipreading is not a great way to get access to spoken English. Deaf children with a strong first language in ASL become better readers therefore acquiring English via reading and writing.

 

[Lighthouse77]

ok.

most hearing people get spoken language everyday. before, during, and afterschool. We all know that it is impossible to have speech therapy 24/7 when there are other things to learn beside spoken languages.