Teacher of the Deaf programs

[faire_jour]

I am not against it, I just pointing out any teachers can be hired do it. They are not uneducated as you think.

And I disagree. I think teachers of the deaf should work with deaf kids and regular ed teachers should work with average hearing students.

 

[A]

Phonics is reading in my daughter's class, it has nothing to do with the words coming out of her mouth.

For example:

She would have a page that says-

AT

cat mat fat rat sat hat bat

She sound out all those words and then move on to a story with all AT sound words. She is learning to read using phonics.

yep. I think we all did that. I ought to show you my son's school work on those things when he was preschool/Kindergarten. You should not make judgement that public school teachers would not know how to teach CI/HOH deaf kids using auditory-based teaching. Just that they have their hands full, that's all.

 

[faire_jour]

yep. I think we all did that. I ought to show you my son's school work on those things when he was preschool/Kindergarten. You should not make judgement that public school teachers would not know how to teach CI/HOH deaf kids using auditory-based teaching. Just that they have their hands full, that's all.

Not at all. This is absolutly how every hearing school teaches reading. I was posting that to show it wasn't speech therapy. Yes, nearly every hearing class teaches reading through phonics. That was not an example of deaf ed vs mainstream.

 

[A]

If that's what you prefer, Then auditory-based TOD college classes ought to make it more attractive to people who want to work with deaf people with visual teaching and ASL. Then you have more TOD.

But don't ever tell me that public school teachers have NO IDEA what a deaf child need and that they are very uneducated because They did everything as you described how a TOD should handle CI/HOH deaf children. plus notes on board/paper, facing me, projectors, speak clearly, keep lights on, etc. some of them forgot or care less, but most of them did what they could do. Or tell me that if they were educated, I would perform better... but I am not a CI deaf or mild/moderate HOH.

 

[faire_jour]

If that's what you prefer, Then auditory-based TOD college classes ought to make it more attractive to people who want to work with deaf people with visual teaching and ASL. Then you have more TOD.

But don't ever tell me that public school teachers have NO IDEA what a deaf child need and that they are very uneducated because They did everything as you described how a TOD should handle CI/HOH deaf children. plus notes on board/paper, facing me, projectors, speak clearly, keep lights on, etc. some of them forgot or care less, but most of them did what they could do. Or tell me that if they were educated, I would perform better... but I am not a CI deaf or mild/moderate HOH.

Are you saying that you had a good educational experience? I thought you hated the mainstream and thought that deaf kids shouldn't be mainstreamed? Now you think that regular ed is just fine?

 

[A]

Are you saying that you had a good educational experience? I thought you hated the mainstream and thought that deaf kids shouldn't be mainstreamed? Now you think that regular ed is just fine?

Oh I do hate it. But I don't hate my teachers, at least most of them. (edited: Hate is a strong word. I don't hate any of them.. I just don't like how some treated me).


Some of them are on my facebook


They shouldn't be mainstreamed.

 

[faire_jour]

Oh I do hate it. But I don't hate my teachers, at least most of them.
Some of them are on my facebook


They shouldn't be mainstreamed.

Then what option do parents have if their child uses spoken language? They can mainstream or they can have them in a class for the deaf, with a teacher of the deaf. Which would you prefer?

 

[KristinaB]

Do you think that hearing kids learning to read using phonics is a speech lesson? It is reading.

I beg to differ - My daughter's speech teacher is the one who did the phonics lessons with her to get her to even speak. Other than "baby babble" my daughter did not speak until she was 5 or 6. We tried everything at home as did the Head Start teacher, First Steps and all professionals. It was the Speech Therapist during ESCE and Kindergarten that got her talking by doing many, many phonics lessons. The classroom teacher did not do them.

 

[faire_jour]

I beg to differ - My daughter's speech teacher is the one who did the phonics lessons with her to get her to even speak. Other than "baby babble" my daughter did not speak until she was 5 or 6. We tried everything at home as did the Head Start teacher, First Steps and all professionals. It was the Speech Therapist during ESCE and Kindergarten that got her talking by doing many, many phonics lessons. The classroom teacher did not do them.

Was she reading or speaking? I am talking about sounding out words for reading NOT speech lessons.

 

[A]

Then what option do parents have if their child uses spoken language? They can mainstream or they can have them in a class for the deaf, with a teacher of the deaf. Which would you prefer?

If it was me for my type of hearing, I would choose ASL/Spoken/written class for the deaf with TOD who know both (I don't mean one teacher who know both method, I mean TEACHERS who specialized different areas) But not oral-only approch.

and I would want more than one TOD for different areas... having one teacher all the time make kids feel envious of hearing kids. I was envious of deaf kids who knew ASL.

 

[KristinaB]

Not at all. This is absolutly how every hearing school teaches reading. I was posting that to show it wasn't speech therapy. Yes, nearly every hearing class teaches reading through phonics. That was not an example of deaf ed vs mainstream.

None of the public school classrooms I have ever been in, mine, my 2 children or my nieces and nephews have ever had their reading lessons based on phonics. This was in 3 different states. Florida, Georgia, Missouri.

 

[KristinaB]

Was she reading or speaking? I am talking about sounding out words for reading NOT speech lessons.

At the beginning, it was speech, then it moved onto reading. The teachers did NOT do phonics. She didn't learn to read until she was 9.

 

[faire_jour]

None of the public school classrooms I have ever been in, mine, my 2 children or my nieces and nephews have ever had their reading lessons based on phonics. This was in 3 different states. Florida, Georgia, Missouri.

So they learned by sight words only?

I grew up in Ohio, my husband in Utah, my mother in W.V, my father in NC, all of us used phonics.

 

[A]

None of the public school classrooms I have ever been in, mine, my 2 children or my nieces and nephews have ever had their reading lessons based on phonics. This was in 3 different states. Florida, Georgia, Missouri.

really? interesting. I guess it depend on the teachers.

 

[KristinaB]

So they learned by sight words only?

I grew up in Ohio, my husband in Utah, my mother in W.V, my father in NC, all of us used phonics.

They learned by sight, yes. My daughter learned to read primarily through the CC on TV. That's when everything "clicked" for her. We then moved to books on tape.

 

[A]

I don't understand your point. Are you saying that you had a great education in special ed? If so, fabulous, I'm glad. I don't want my child to be in special ed because she does not have a learning disability, she is deaf. She needs to be taught by people who understand deafness and how deaf children learn. Why are you against that?

Just to clarify. I only had Special Education in English, but special education does not mean learning disability. I was never diagnosed with LD. I was just behind in my writing because of my deafness. If your child taking speech therapy, that also mean special education (I got kinda shocked when the speech therapist mention that I had to sign a form for special education... I thought "is there something about our son that I don't know about???" )

 

[jillio]

You said that phonics was speech and didn't belong in the classroom. I disagree. Phonics is a way of teaching reading. It may not belong in your classroom, but it does belong in some classrooms.

Phonics can be applied to speech. It can also be used as a method for teaching reading. However, when it is applied as a method for teaching reading it is directly related to sounding out a word by the way the phonetic breakdown would sound. If one does not know how a word sounds, or how the phonetic components of that word sound, phonics is a relatively useless method for teaching reading. In short, phonetic reading is based on hearing speech. The deaf have to be taught speech to make phonetic reading applicable. So Shel's point was on target.

 

[jillio]

So they learned by sight words only?

I grew up in Ohio, my husband in Utah, my mother in W.V, my father in NC, all of us used phonics.

Hmmm...I'm from Ohio, and I was taught using the whole word approach...in short, sight reading. That is why it is important to know what methodology is being used in your child's class room and whether it is pertinent to their learning style. Not all schools use the same methodology, and methodologies change over time. You cannot simply assume that because a particular methodology was used last year, it is also being used this year.

 

[deafskeptic]

Actually the trend is turning with the greater push toward mainstreaming. Deaf/HOH students are being taught by mainstream teachers and are being pulled out to work with ToDs on a as needed basis. Some kids get preteaching of vocabulary or concepts, extra support in trouble areas or lessons in Deaf culture/history that is not taught to the hearing kids.

Many kids only see their ToD for up to an hour once a week... or less. In districts where ToDs are scarce, interpreters or paraprofessionals are working above and beyond to cover.

Seeing a ToD once a week won't cut if if my friends' and my personal experinece are any example. I'm sure we are not the only one either given the stories I've heard.

 

[deafskeptic]

Phonics can be applied to speech. It can also be used as a method for teaching reading. However, when it is applied as a method for teaching reading it is directly related to sounding out a word by the way the phonetic breakdown would sound. If one does not know how a word sounds, or how the phonetic components of that word sound, phonics is a relatively useless method for teaching reading. In short, phonetic reading is based on hearing speech. The deaf have to be taught speech to make phonetic reading applicable. So Shel's point was on target.

Exactly. Phonics have never been my forte in English and don't get me started on foreign words. I know a lot of words in English but I have no idea how to pronounce them because English phonics isn't very inconsistent. The word fish could just easily be spelled ghoti for example.