Parents sue to keep SD School for the Deaf open

[shel90]

Haven't you (and others) said "Shut down the oral only programs"?

In fact, I've only seen ONE person say "Let's shut down deaf schools" (others just don't have faith in them, but that doesn't mean they believe they should be shut down) but I've seen NUMEROUS people say "Screw the oral only programs, they should be abolished."

Just saying that you have a LOT of people on your side and you shouldn't feel hurt. Also, has it occurred to you that you work in a very good school?

Oral-only, yep, cuz of too many risks associated with it. Until the number of kids becoming language delayed or end up with language deficits from those programs reduce to a complete zero, I still wont support them. Once a child becomes language delayed or have deficits in their first language, life is a struggle for them. I feel very very strongly about it because I work with too many of them. Even a simple sentence like "What day is two weeks from now" is holds no meaning for them until like around preteens. I just cannot accept these kinds of language delays..There is also the issue of physo-socio development. How many people come in here on AD wishing they had known sign language or had met other deaf people growing up.

I have always supported having both hence the BiBi approach. Never supported having just only ASL-only or Oral-only.

A lot of people on my side? Really..the congresspeople, the politicans and the medical community, and general society? I dont think so. That was what I was referring to...

Anyways, if people dont like the idea of dorms, then they can go ahead and petition to have them shut down. I am not going to stop them but I wont start a petition to shut them down.

 

[shel90]

A question for you, Daredevel...


Do you realize that the deaf schools quite often serve the kids that the mainstream has already failed completely? Public schools don’t just pay the tuition to send a student to a deaf school just because that is what the parents want. It has to be proven that the mainstream is not serving the needs properly of the deaf student before a public system can be compelled to pay the student’s tuition to a deaf school. And the public system will fight it tooth and nail because they don’t want to send the funding to the deaf school. They want to keep it in their own district and then provide only a minimum of accommodations. It is all under the LRE provision.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Deaf perspective...

I have never really felt in place anywhere until I went to the University of Alberta and lived in dorm. Granted, the dorm I lived in, aka Lister Centre, is highly regarded as the best post-secondary dorm in North America and usually have students staying for 4 years or more, also with graduates choosing to stay close to the dorm, in campus villages. The only reason why I left dorm was because of a huge change in policy that I didn't agree with, which was eviction of students on minor charges. So why would I support that policy with my own money?

Anyway, the impression I get from most Deaf people, who grew up in Deaf schools, is similar to my experience at Lister Centre. There is a sense of communal friendship, and if someone get sick or hurt, the whole community shows up. Everyone knew who everyone else was, and how to approach each others. In fact, if you meet someone new and you forgot to ask them about personal details, you can contact them later because you would bump into them again anyway! To be honest, when it was time to go back home for the summer break, I was hesitant, but went home anyway because campus would be dead as heck.

So sure, the dorm I went to was hearing, but no one cared about my deafness or sight loss there, they knew how to communicate via whiteboards and text messaging. However I never really got that feeling while attending mainstream school when I was growing up. I can only imagine how wonderful a Deaf dorm school would be, especially if it is a BiBi education targeting to meet the government's standardized curriculum.

So... just something to think about.

 

[Daredevel7]

A question for you, Daredevel...


Do you realize that the deaf schools quite often serve the kids that the mainstream has already failed completely? Public schools don’t just pay the tuition to send a student to a deaf school just because that is what the parents want. It has to be proven that the mainstream is not serving the needs properly of the deaf student before a public system can be compelled to pay the student’s tuition to a deaf school. And the public system will fight it tooth and nail because they don’t want to send the funding to the deaf school. They want to keep it in their own district and then provide only a minimum of accommodations. It is all under the LRE provision.

I do realize that the deaf schools serve kids that the mainstream has already failed. To most people, they are the "last resort" for deaf kids. I would have gone to a BiBi/TC school if I didn't do well in mainstream. Actually I am not sure, I might have gone to a deaf school if I didn't lipread well, because my mom did start learning to sign when she found out that I was deaf.

However, you do realize what you're asking? You're asking for all parents to send their kids or move to the nearest state deaf school so that there is a healthy number of deaf kids in the school, thus making the funds worth it. Not only that, but they must do it as soon as they can because the earlier, the better, right?

Let's face it, funding a WHOLE school for a handful of kids isn't effective. It may be the best for them, but at what cost? Should we pay twice more for deaf kids than hearing kids? Is it more effective to set aside 1 million dollars for a school for 20 deaf kids or for a school for 100 kids from the projects? What if the government did studies that were never released on the return of investment on deaf schools compared to deaf programs? It's easy to do this. Simply look at the amount of money taken from SSI from those from deaf schools vs deaf programs.

 

[shel90]

I do realize that the deaf schools serve kids that the mainstream has already failed. To most people, they are the "last resort" for deaf kids. I would have gone to a BiBi/TC school if I didn't do well in mainstream. Actually I am not sure, I might have gone to a deaf school if I didn't lipread well, because my mom did start learning to sign when she found out that I was deaf.

However, you do realize what you're asking? You're asking for all parents to send their kids or move to the nearest state deaf school so that there is a healthy number of deaf kids in the school, thus making the funds worth it. Not only that, but they must do it as soon as they can because the earlier, the better, right?

Let's face it, funding a WHOLE school for a handful of kids isn't effective. It may be the best for them, but at what cost? Should we pay twice more for deaf kids than hearing kids? Is it more effective to set aside 1 million dollars for a school for 20 deaf kids or for a school for 100 kids from the projects? What if the government did studies that were never released on the return of investment on deaf schools compared to deaf programs? It's easy to do this. Simply look at the amount of money taken from SSI from those from deaf schools vs deaf programs.

Then I guess your view is more of a cost-effective one. I just want the children to have equal access to education, language, and their environment.

 

[Daredevel7]

Then I guess your view is more of a cost-effective one. I just want the children to have equal access to education, language, and their environment.

You're doing the best you can, and I applaud you for it. But sometimes real life gets in the way.

Man, I sound sooooo depressing....

 

[Bebonang]

Then I guess your view is more of a cost-effective one. I just want the children to have equal access to education, language, and their environment.

I don't care about the cost-effective or lack of funding for the whole deaf school. I agree with Shel that children are very important to get equal access to deaf education, ASL and English language plus their lifestyle environment in the dormitory. This learning and lifestlye are very unique and productive than have to go through the struggle of trying to learn in the school environment. I struggled very badly and I don't like oral-only programs in the hearing schools.

 

[deafdyke]

Obviously you don't know what the term means.

Um, yes I do. A Deaf School is an insistution, but it's not an insistution ala a mental hospital or a nursing home or the insistutions for people with cognitive disabilites.
Botte, I hate to say this, but I think you're a little too idealistic as to the benifits of mainstreaming/ neighborhood school. It SHOULD be an option for those kids who don't really need a lot of support. However, the thing is.....most mainstream teachers really have no clue how to teach kids with classic disabilites. As a result, instead of something like "mainstream trickle down" ( "improved"/ better quality of education as a result of being in the mainstream) , taking place dhh ( and other kids with classic disabilites) kids basicly get lumped in with the type of resource room kids who are " Ummmm who's President Obama?" It's a plain and simple fact that most if not all mainstream teachers do not know how to teach kids with more classic disabilites.
Hell....even my parents now say that they should have sent me to a school for the deaf or at least a regional program for dhh kids.
Besides if the mainstream is so good, then how come educational acheivement hasn't risen. Most dhh kids ARE mainstreamed.
And, I think you don't realize that not every kid has the advantages of being middle class or living with an emotionally healthy family.
Would you say that a kid from East St. Louis or Mott Haven or a homeless kid should stay with their family in a gang/drug infested neighborhood?
Hell, the school I attended was horrible (very whitebread/ Stepford Wife-ish)
Mainstreaming does not automaticly confer all the advantages you'd think it would. Yes, it should be an option........but it does seem like a lot of experts and other people who advocate mainstreaming are VERY out of touch about all the downsides of mainstreaming.

 

[dreama]

I have been working at a Deaf school for 7 years and it is already like a 2nd home to me and many of the children there expressed the same. It is my heart and soul besides my family and for anyone to disregard that is very hurtful. I try to react nicely about it by educating people that not all deaf schools arent the way they described. Maybe in the past and maybe in some but if there are some deaf schools that people feel are horrible, isnt anyone doing anything to help improve them? It seems like the easy answer is to shut them down but many fail to understand the phychological ramifications of it. For anyone to support the shutting down of deaf schools is like telling me all the hard work I and others have contributed to ensure that these kids get the education they deserve is not worthy. I am very passionate about my job and I have been more criticized about it simply because I work at a deaf school not because of what I do or dont do. I feel that the staff who work at deaf schools dont get enough respect from the public and then to get the same disrespect from deaf people is even more hurtful.

If there are any teachers or staff that hurt the children, then they should be addressed as individuals rather than making blanket statements about the rest of us. I would like to know..how many of you have stepped inside a deaf school and observed it from an objective view?

Again I have stated previously that all deaf schools have room for improvement but so do public schools. Do we cry for the shut down of public schools? No..so why the support for the shut down of Deaf schools? There are people with jobs and they do it for the love of the children not for the pay cuz I have news for you..the pay really stinks!

There is a strong sense of community at where I work and I feel proud to be a part of it. It is unique...there are just no words to describe it. Older and former students have expressed that to me and to my co-workers. I am sure there are some students who hated their experiences at the deaf schools and dont want to anything to do with us but I would be happy to hear from them and their experiences so I can help make the schools better for the future but all I get were "Deaf schools suck." It is not enough information. If they suck because of dorms, then maybe they child shouldnt go to the dorms in the first place but the parents make the decisions about that not the school. It is not like the old days when all deaf children were required to be residents of the school. The dorms are there for students who live far and the parents have been pleased with the schools enough to send their children to the dorms for the week. However that consists a very small population.

Now, I dont know about every deaf school...if there are some that are so awful, then I hope someone is doing something to help improve them. If people are complaining about it and doing nothing about it, maybe they are just as much as fault as the administrators for not taking action. I can't solve every deaf school's problem but I can say this...my experience with them has been so positive and all the students I have come in contact with have expressed that. Maybe they will feel differently in the future...who knows? All I just wanted to say that the shut down of deaf schools are not going to solve all the problems in Deaf education. It is not as simple. It is a very complicated system that needs revamping. I am out there on committees to be part of different teams focusing on improving the quality of deaf education. My job is my life besides my family. To tell me that all deaf schools suck and should all be shut down is telling me that my job is not respected at all. It can be hurtful.

I may get banned after this but I just couldnt keep quiet any longer.

Good post!

 

[KarissaMann05]

Shel90 KarissaMann05

Said well. I'm still not happy how it turned out. =/ I hate to see deaf schools shut down. It makes me mad, yet sad.

 

[Buffalo]

I do realize that the deaf schools serve kids that the mainstream has already failed. To most people, they are the "last resort" for deaf kids. I would have gone to a BiBi/TC school if I didn't do well in mainstream. Actually I am not sure, I might have gone to a deaf school if I didn't lipread well, because my mom did start learning to sign when she found out that I was deaf.

However, you do realize what you're asking? You're asking for all parents to send their kids or move to the nearest state deaf school so that there is a healthy number of deaf kids in the school, thus making the funds worth it. Not only that, but they must do it as soon as they can because the earlier, the better, right?

Let's face it, funding a WHOLE school for a handful of kids isn't effective. It may be the best for them, but at what cost? Should we pay twice more for deaf kids than hearing kids? Is it more effective to set aside 1 million dollars for a school for 20 deaf kids or for a school for 100 kids from the projects? What if the government did studies that were never released on the return of investment on deaf schools compared to deaf programs? It's easy to do this. Simply look at the amount of money taken from SSI from those from deaf schools vs deaf programs.

I think it is far cheaper to send all deaf kids to a state school with a good education program. Suppose there are 500 kids at a state school for the deaf and maybe there are 100 teachers/staff/cleaning crew/supervisiors. That is the salaries for those 100 people. Now if those same kids are scattering around in district schools and they required interpreters. Let's say there are few deaf kids in same grade and we reduce the number from 500 to 400. That is the salaries for 400 interpreters. That is a lot of money. I can imagine more money for psychology treatments on top of that because the kids had so much problems being the only deaf kid in the school. Would those deaf kids hold down jobs if they feel left out of many things? Probably not, back to those SSI/SSD for those kids.

I still think it is a lot cheaper for everybody to know sign language like Martha's Vineyard in 18th and 19th centuries. That way the deaf people would be able to be hired at anyplace. Almost no SSD/SSI and no need for those expensive hearing aids/Cochlear Implants and those endless need for those batteries.

As usual, it requires hearing people to screw things up royally for the deaf population. The hearing people sure know how to make things expensive for us as in "you need to hear to understand us", "you need to learn to speak so you can be included in conversations", "Sign language is for the monkeys, not humans". Any excuses from learning sign language will do.

 

[Daredevel7]

I think it is far cheaper to send all deaf kids to a state school with a good education program. Suppose there are 500 kids at a state school for the deaf and maybe there are 100 teachers/staff/cleaning crew/supervisiors. That is the salaries for those 100 people. Now if those same kids are scattering around in district schools and they required interpreters. Let's say there are few deaf kids in same grade and we reduce the number from 500 to 400. That is the salaries for 400 interpreters. That is a lot of money. I can imagine more money for psychology treatments on top of that because the kids had so much problems being the only deaf kid in the school. Would those deaf kids hold down jobs if they feel left out of many things? Probably not, back to those SSI/SSD for those kids.

400 interpreters (who get paid less than teachers) + school already paid for >>>> 100 teachers/crew salaries + funding a whole school year round (books, landscaping, desks, electricity, and so on)

mmmmm, I dont think so. If deaf schools were ultimately cost effective, they would keep them. I am definitely not saying that deaf kids in oral or whatever schools do better than those who go to deaf schools, but maybe those who DO go to deaf schools don't do THAT much better than those who go to mainstream schools, at least not enough to warrant funding for deaf schools.

 

[shel90]

400 interpreters (who get paid less than teachers) + school already paid for >>>> 100 teachers/crew salaries + funding a whole school year round (books, landscaping, desks, electricity, and so on)

mmmmm, I dont think so. If deaf schools were ultimately cost effective, they would keep them. I am definitely not saying that deaf kids in oral or whatever schools do better than those who go to deaf schools, but maybe those who DO go to deaf schools don't do THAT much better than those who go to mainstream schools, at least not enough to warrant funding for deaf schools.

Then again why many deaf children get sent to the deaf schools after being failed by the mainstreamed programs?

In my view, this isn’t about a cost/benefit analysis. Our kids are much, much more than a business proposition. We are talking lives.

 

[Buffalo]

Then again why many deaf children get sent to the deaf schools after being failed by the mainstreamed programs?

In my view, this isn’t about a cost/benefit analysis. Our kids are much, much more than a business proposition. We are talking lives.

You said it better than I.

 

[Daredevel7]

Then again why many deaf children get sent to the deaf schools after being failed by the mainstreamed programs?

In my view, this isn’t about a cost/benefit analysis. Our kids are much, much more than a business proposition. We are talking lives.

So are senior citizens, so are veterans, so are homeless. What about their lives? Let's give them care they need, let's give them homes. ALL of them. We know it's not feasible, we can only help SOME of them within a limited budget.

They get sent to deaf schools after being failed by mainstream programs because the mainstream programs don't work for them. It seems like you're saying the ONLY solution is to keep all the state deaf schools, nothing to do with reworking the mainstream or whatever programs.

By the way, I am talking about only GOVERNMENT funded schools. I am not saying to shut them all down, I am saying there HAS to be a limited number of those schools. Even YOU must agree with that. I highly doubt all deaf schools will be shut down, especially those near a highly populated city, because THEY are indeed worth it. There are enough high quality teachers around, there are enough kids to make it worth it, and so on. Have you noticed that the schools that are being shut down are in low populated states?

 

[shel90]

So are senior citizens, so are veterans, so are homeless. What about their lives? Let's give them care they need, let's give them homes. ALL of them. We know it's not feasible, we can only help SOME of them within a limited budget.

They get sent to deaf schools after being failed by mainstream programs because the mainstream programs don't work for them. It seems like you're saying the ONLY solution is to keep all the state deaf schools, nothing to do with reworking the mainstream or whatever programs.

By the way, I am talking about only GOVERNMENT funded schools. I am not saying to shut them all down, I am saying there HAS to be a limited number of those schools. Even YOU must agree with that. I highly doubt all deaf schools will be shut down, especially those near a highly populated city, because THEY are indeed worth it. There are enough high quality teachers around, there are enough kids to make it worth it, and so on. Have you noticed that the schools that are being shut down are in low populated states?

If the manstreamed programs would listen to a panel of mixed deaf and hearing people instead of only hearing people when making policies regarding deaf education, I think they will improve but that even takes money too.

As for schools closing down due to very low enrollment, I can understand but my argument was against the proposal for closing ALL of them just o save costs. That I don't agree with.

 

[Daredevel7]

If the manstreamed programs would listen to a panel of mixed deaf and hearing people instead of only hearing people when making policies regarding deaf education, I think they will improve but that even takes money too.

As for schools closing down due to very low enrollment, I can understand but my argument was against the proposal for closing ALL of them just o save costs. That I don't agree with.

Nah, I doubt closing them all will ever happen, at least not anytime soon. There's a possibility that may happen with improved technology for hearing restoration, but now? Nope.

Also I agree with you on the first paragraph.

 

[deafdyke]

Well, even thou the schools that are being shut down are in states with low population density, that's still not a good thing. Due to low population density, there prolly wouldn't be enough resources to create regional programs for the dhh.

 

[shel90]

Well, even thou the schools that are being shut down are in states with low population density, that's still not a good thing. Due to low population density, there prolly wouldn't be enough resources to create regional programs for the dhh.

And that's a very big concern of mine...

 

[Daredevel7]

Well, even thou the schools that are being shut down are in states with low population density, that's still not a good thing. Due to low population density, there prolly wouldn't be enough resources to create regional programs for the dhh.

There already aren't enough resources for the deaf school.

What other schools have been shut down already? I'm curious to see what happened to those kids afterwards.