Could budget cuts in the mainstream lead to increased enrollement at deaf schools?

Get a room, you two!
 
It has been flatly stated that auditory therapy is cruel and should not be allowed in a bi-bi school.
Click to expand...
Auditory VERBAL, not auditory therapy. There is a difference. Auditory verbal obessess over not even allowing speechreading.
Honey, you can be bi bi with ASL and spoken English, in the educational setting, just the way you can be bi bi with French and English in the educational setting. My best friend went to a school where they learned in French in the morning and then English in the afternoon.
Just get over it..........you had a horrible experiance with Utah School for the Deaf and Blind. They do not represent ALL bi bi Deaf Schools.
 
Wirelessly posted

deafdyke said:
It has been flatly stated that auditory therapy is cruel and should not be allowed in a bi-bi school.
Click to expand...
Auditory VERBAL, not auditory therapy. There is a difference. Auditory verbal obessess over not even allowing speechreading.
Honey, you can be bi bi with ASL and spoken English, in the educational setting, just the way you can be bi bi with French and English in the educational setting. My best friend went to a school where they learned in French in the morning and then English in the afternoon.
Just get over it..........you had a horrible experiance with Utah School for the Deaf and Blind. They do not represent ALL bi bi Deaf Schools.
Click to expand...

yes they can, but they don't. There are 3, maybe 4 programs that allow auditory access in the classroom. The rest will not.
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



the only people who believe there is only one way to raise a deaf child are fools.

i don't know a single parent who wants to deny families choices. There are parents here who use ASL, some with CIs, and others who use SEE. We each are giving our children tools to communicate, and each child is different.
Click to expand...

Not an answer to the question.
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



nope, that is not what is being said. It has been flatly stated that auditory therapy is cruel and should not be allowed in a bi-bi school.

ASL MUST be voice off to be ASL, therefore, yes, you are demanding voice off.

it has also been stated that a child should have access to ASL at all times at home and school, so where does that leave spoken english?
Click to expand...

**shaking head at the idiotic interpretation of what is said and the overwhelming need to be the center of attention by creating drama that is not there otherwise.**
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



yes they can, but they don't. There are 3, maybe 4 programs that allow auditory access in the classroom. The rest will not.
Click to expand...

Sound exists in all classrooms. It cannot be blocked. As long as sound exists, auditory access is permitted.:roll:
 
To answer the question, budget cuts should not affect modifications and accommodations allowed in mainstreamed education as they are required by law; it can,however, allow the IEP committee realize the current modifications and/or accommodations is/are too costly and as long as they provide something that is "appropriate" and will allow the child to have access to the general curriculum, then they can change what was provided into something different. Example: Using an Elmo to enlarge text...if they cannot afford an Elmo, then they can change that by saying enlarge text via copy machine (old fashioned way).

Budget restrictions should never be a factor in determining placement...if mainstreamed education is appropriate, then that child deserves to go there...even if there are no money. The school is going to have to figure it out. Simply sending a deaf or hard of hearing child to a deaf school based on budget reasons is really unethical.

Unfortunately we are not required to give the BEST modification or accommodation out there...only what is good enough. Sad, huh.
 
yes they can, but they don't. There are 3, maybe 4 programs that allow auditory access in the classroom. The rest will not.
Click to expand...
Um do you know that for sure? Have you honestly visted every single Deaf School or program in the nation?
 
deafbajagal said:
To answer the question, budget cuts should not affect modifications and accommodations allowed in mainstreamed education as they are required by law; it can,however, allow the IEP committee realize the current modifications and/or accommodations is/are too costly and as long as they provide something that is "appropriate" and will allow the child to have access to the general curriculum, then they can change what was provided into something different. Example: Using an Elmo to enlarge text...if they cannot afford an Elmo, then they can change that by saying enlarge text via copy machine (old fashioned way).

Budget restrictions should never be a factor in determining placement...if mainstreamed education is appropriate, then that child deserves to go there...even if there are no money. The school is going to have to figure it out. Simply sending a deaf or hard of hearing child to a deaf school based on budget reasons is really unethical.

Unfortunately we are not required to give the BEST modification or accommodation out there...only what is good enough. Sad, huh.
Click to expand...

My concern with these budget cuts in the public schools are the elimination of teachers qualified to teach deaf children. That's is when I support the idea of sending children to deaf schools...at least the teachers there are qualified to teach deaf children than a regular ed classroom teacher. IMO
 
deafdyke said:
Um do you know that for sure? Have you honestly visted every single Deaf School or program in the nation?
Click to expand...

DD, I think It's pretty unique To have an auditory access program within a traditional bi-bi school right now, but not for long: several prominent schools for the deaf have sent teams to observe my daughter's class this year along with videographers to document the approach with plans to try to replicate the program locally. the GAO sent a group to observe and assess the program as a potential model and I've heard that went well. And the school is working very closely with Gallaudet -- their VL2 team is on campus all week kicking off a 3 year program in which they are going to follow a set of 3--5 YOs to understand how school and family approach affect literacy.
 
shel90 said:
My concern with these budget cuts in the public schools are the elimination of teachers qualified to teach deaf children. That's is when I support the idea of sending children to deaf schools...at least the teachers there are qualified to teach deaf children than a regular ed classroom teacher. IMO
Click to expand...

That's a valid concern. The parents need to be sure "qualified deaf education teacher/specialist" is in the IEPs, too.
 
An IEP is not about "child will have xyz technology". It is about "child has abc need/issue and xyz technology can address that." What is ideal tends to be the most expensive...even if it is simple like smaller class sizes. But if we advocate a complete toolbox, then we can't look down on kids with CIs.

Is the problem that children with CIs who do not use ASL as main method of instruction will have more expensive qualifications?

So if I have a CI and I'm signing ASL and going to public school and doing great, is that somehow "better" than the student who has a CI and needs more expensive technology to "hear normally" ?

curious.
 
TheOracle said:
So if I have a CI and I'm signing ASL and going to public school and doing great, is that somehow "better" than the student who has a CI and needs more expensive technology to "hear normally" ?

curious.
Click to expand...

For one thing, there's no such thing as "hearing normally" with CIs: any child with CIs is deaf and can't hear 'normally', and as with HAs, the technology provides access to sound that gives different results for every individual. We expect that a CI will provide some access to sound, and averages do show that the vast majority find very positive results, but there's no guaranteed level of hearing.

That aside, what expensive technology would a child with a CI using ASL in a public school not require that a child with a CI using SEE or spoken language would require?
 
That's why I used the quotations. I know that CIs and HA are not the same as slapping on some glasses to correct blurry vision. :)

I think Jilli was pointing out that from a monetary view, children who know ASL and use it in their classroom (effectively) will cost less to educate than a child who needs a lot of assistive technology.

I'm not advocating that at all. That was just the vibe I have been getting (I've been eyeballing this board for awhile) based on her commentary. I was just asking for clarification.

I think what you chose for your daughter is exactly what I would have done. When we have children, regardless of who we are, the first thing we think is, "What is the best I can do for my child so that he/she can grow up happy, healthy, educated and self sufficient with as few limitations as possible?"

I teach ESL. My students and their parents (generally) think a solid grasp in English as a must for success. That means speaking, understanding, writing and reading. On top of that, their kids will have to be bright, forward thinking, and push on to be successful - not to mention have a little luck. It isn't about what language or culture is superior or preferable - it's about what is best for the child, and a lot of parents believe that barriers to being fully integrated into mainstream society will hurt.

I fully believe in foreign language education! So do most of my students. I haaaaaaatteeeee subtractive teaching. I hate it when my students can't practice their L1 language.

So I definitely feel sad when parents don't want their children to know sign language and would rather their kids just have "normal" hearing. Again, normal in quotes.

Kids who don't feel they completely belong to the Deaf culture or "hearing"/everyone else often feel the kind of identity misplacement similar to first generation immigrants.
 
TheOracle said:
That's why I used the quotations. I know that CIs and HA are not the same as slapping on some glasses to correct blurry vision. :)
Click to expand...
I'm sorry I jumped on that 'normal hearing' thing so quickly :) I always worry that people expect CIs to work like a light switch and turn on a "hearing" child or think that all kids with CIs access sound in the same way and there's a common standard that they have to achieve to be considered successful.

"I hate it when my students can't practice their L1 language." Me too! Drives me crazy that my mother can't speak her native language today because she was forced never to use it as a young child, rather than embracing it along with English.
 
GrendelQ said:
I'm sorry I jumped on that 'normal hearing' thing so quickly :) I always worry that people expect CIs to work like a light switch and turn on a "hearing" child or think that all kids with CIs access sound in the same way and there's a common standard that they have to achieve to be considered successful.
Click to expand...

So true..In this month alone, we will get 4 new students from mainstreamed programs...all have CIs. Seems like they were left to fend for themselves without support and now are struggling. That's just too much for me. But at least they will finally be in a program with staff who are qualified in the field of deaf ed.
 
Are they struggling academically? Not having enough language support? Both? No ASL? How?
 
TheOracle said:
Are they struggling academically? Not having enough language support? Both? No ASL? How?
Click to expand...

I was raised orally all of my life. I struggled but did pass my classes. One doesnt have to get D's and Fs to struggle. There is the socio-emotional issue as well. That was my biggest struggle but yet, I was pushed to stay mainstreamed until I graduated. At least these kids got recognization that by being mainstreamed wasnt working for them and something is being done rather than ignoring the issues and keep pushing them to stay.

I cant answer your questions as I dont know a lot right now but the fact that 4 kids are being transferred from mainstreamed programs in one month alone says a lot.
 
shel90 said:
I was raised orally all of my life. I struggled but did pass my classes. One doesnt have to get D's and Fs to struggle. There is the socio-emotional issue as well. That was my biggest struggle but yet, I was pushed to stay mainstreamed until I graduated. At least these kids got recognization that by being mainstreamed wasnt working for them and something is being done rather than ignoring the issues and keep pushing them to stay.

I cant answer your questions as I dont know a lot right now but the fact that 4 kids are being transferred from mainstreamed programs in one month alone says a lot.
Click to expand...

I've seen many students struggle, "pass", and are totally not proficient. :( I was curious about what qualified as struggling...like, what was the struggle point? Why are they coming to you?

4 students in a month does say something. As an educator and someone who studies language development, I'm curious about *what* it says and *why* they are being transferred. Also, I have a lot of issues with this whole mainstreaming/LRE thing. It's pretty much an excuse for (a lot of) schools to provide less. NEEDS AREN'T BEING MET.

I'm TOTALLY awesome with kids who have disabilities of any kind in my classroom - but if I can't effectively teach them, then not only is it my ass on the line for things out of my control, but it's just not fair. :( And then I feel bad. *sigh* And like most of my colleagues, I inflate grades if I have to.
 
PS Before I get jumped on for grade inflation, understand that I teach high school in a metro area and and there isn't a lot of remedial work in literacy that can be done by that point. Most of our kids come through with waayyy below grade level reading scores AND I teach ESL, so they're further at disadvantage. So if I have kids behind + ESL + disability + dang near ready to graduate then I face a slightly different problem. I'm a super dooper advocate for my students. Trust me. But unfortunately, the school's attitude is a little more, "Make it happen!" than "Let's see what we can do for this student."
 
Back
Top