Why can't we have Deaf Ed like this in the US?

To explain, the school that deafdyke posted a link to is actually my former school. And I just wanted to point out then back then and even now, all the kids loved going to school, there was hardly any absenses. My mum said I absolutely adored loved going to school. You all may not think it's the appropriate setting for a deaf child but for me it was perfect!! I had the best of both worlds, I was exposed to sign many times throughout the day, but I'm just one of the people, where sign is very beneficial to have receptively but not expressively.

But now I think all deaf schools should have both languages at the same time, or at least sign for the majority of it.
 
Lissa said:
To explain, the school that deafdyke posted a link to is actually my former school. And I just wanted to point out then back then and even now, all the kids loved going to school, there was hardly any absenses. My mum said I absolutely adored loved going to school. You all may not think it's the appropriate setting for a deaf child but for me it was perfect!! I had the best of both worlds, I was exposed to sign many times throughout the day, but I'm just one of the people, where sign is very beneficial to have receptively but not expressively.

But now I think all deaf schools should have both languages at the same time, or at least sign for the majority of it.
Click to expand...

I think the question is how to balance everything. We definitly should not have a Clarke style education where education= basicly oral training. Did you know that even TODAY, Clarke students get speech therapy THREE times a DAY?!?!? I for one see oral education as basicly an eternal speech therapy session. No kid should have to go through something like that. But, that's not to say that some oral training might not be helpful. Especially since most general speech therapists/speech teachers tend to have very little experiance teaching dhh kids. So by the school providing speech services...ala the program at shel's school, kids can work with speech teachers/speech therspists who are actually experianced with working with dhh kids!
 
jillio said:
NP

Well, there is auditory training, and then there is auditory training, if you get my meaning.

Each kid is wired differently, to be sure, but I think it is dangerous to predict a child's future abilities and successes based on how well they can hear.
Click to expand...

dangers like this STILL falls 'on deaf ears' the hearies' minds doesnt hear what we have to fucking say!
 
Buffalo said:
Years ago, I read an article about this old man who lost some hearing. He said that the first thing to go when you lose some hearing is comprehension. That really does make sense because I can identify many sounds but have hard time understand what was being said without lipreading.
Click to expand...

Makes perfect sense.
 
Wirelessly posted

deafdyke said:
Lissa said:
To explain, the school that deafdyke posted a link to is actually my former school. And I just wanted to point out then back then and even now, all the kids loved going to school, there was hardly any absenses. My mum said I absolutely adored loved going to school. You all may not think it's the appropriate setting for a deaf child but for me it was perfect!! I had the best of both worlds, I was exposed to sign many times throughout the day, but I'm just one of the people, where sign is very beneficial to have receptively but not expressively.

But now I think all deaf schools should have both languages at the same time, or at least sign for the majority of it.
Click to expand...

I think the question is how to balance everything. We definitly should not have a Clarke style education where education= basicly oral training. Did you know that even TODAY, Clarke students get speech therapy THREE times a DAY?!?!? I for one see oral education as basicly an eternal speech therapy session. No kid should have to go through something like that. But, that's not to say that some oral training might not be helpful. Especially since most general speech therapists/speech teachers tend to have very little experiance teaching dhh kids. So by the school providing speech services...ala the program at shel's school, kids can work with speech teachers/speech therspists who are actually experianced with working with dhh kids!
Click to expand...

speech three times a day? Are you sure? That seems unlikely. Is it possible that you are including "language arts" or just "language" class?
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



speech three times a day? Are you sure? That seems unlikely. Is it possible that you are including "language arts" or just "language" class?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure. You have to understand that Clarke (Noho campus) is the sole remnaint of what used to be a huge actual oral SCHOOL (meaning not just early intervention preschool/kindergarten) system. In that system they would have speech therapy 3 times a day,
 
Wirelessly posted

deafdyke said:
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



speech three times a day? Are you sure? That seems unlikely. Is it possible that you are including "language arts" or just "language" class?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure. You have to understand that Clarke (Noho campus) is the sole remnaint of what used to be a huge actual oral SCHOOL (meaning not just early intervention preschool/kindergarten) system. In that system they would have speech therapy 3 times a day,
Click to expand...

you know that my daughter CURRENTLY attends one of what you call "name brand oral schools". She does not have speech three times a day. And i have actually spoken to all of them (that go beyond K) and none of them said they had speech more than once a day.
 
Wirelessly posted

deafbajagal said:
Because the spoken skills training are integrated into the curriculum, right?
Click to expand...

yes. Because the language of instruction is spoken language, the vocabulary building and auditory skills work doesn't need to be done in speech therapy. The kids listen all day long.
 
I'd prefer that instead of pull out services. Occasionally, pull outs are okay but not on a regular basis. Kids miss too much instructional time. Imo
 
With me being D/HH and raised completely oral and mainstreamed, I hated it. I hated being the lone kid on the playground, the lone girl getting shoved around in the hallways, the lone senior at graduation.

I feel like I would have benefited if I had the proper support system. Sometimes I wonder if I had fared better at ASD. However, my parents refuse to learn a second language of any sort so therefore, I never had any exposure to ASL other than finger spelling which I learned on my own from books at school. If I had been dropped right into ASD with no knowledge of ASL - I would still have been lost in communication.

I wished I had some kind of bi-bi approach to my education. Not sure if this would have even been feasible as at the time I was the only D/HH student at my school.
 
Lissa said:
To explain, the school that deafdyke posted a link to is actually my former school. And I just wanted to point out then back then and even now, all the kids loved going to school, there was hardly any absenses. My mum said I absolutely adored loved going to school. You all may not think it's the appropriate setting for a deaf child but for me it was perfect!! I had the best of both worlds, I was exposed to sign many times throughout the day, but I'm just one of the people, where sign is very beneficial to have receptively but not expressively.

But now I think all deaf schools should have both languages at the same time, or at least sign for the majority of it.
Click to expand...

We all may bash oral only.....BUT at least auditory-oral formal schools are MUCH MUCH better then the auditory verbal " a dhh kid should idealisticly be the ONLY one in their class/school" mentality. I wonder if people here are mixing up auditory-oral with the auditory verbal approach. I DO strongly support Sign, and believe that kids have the right to grow up bilingal in English and Sign. But, on the other hand.....it does seem like a lot of auditory oral advocates aren't nessarily anti ASL. They just think that spoken English needs to be a dhh child's first language. And at least with private oral schools, there's that connection that does not come with "inclusion" "mainstreaming" .....I do agree with you that all deaf schools/programs should have both languages at the same time. That really was my orgional point. I do think that if the spoken language training offered through Deaf Schools/programs was REALLY good, a lot more hearing parents would opt to enroll their kids in Deaf Schools/Programs. We've reached the point where dhh kids could learn both languages simlotanmously (sp?)
In the old days, it took years for kids to develop sophisciated spoken language skills. Like back in the 70's and 80's kids DID need a Clarke style PK-8 education. Now things have improved. A lot of orally educated kids merely have hoh style delays, as opposed to oral deaf delays. But just b/c things have improved, it doesn't mean that they couldn't benifit from exposure to ASL.
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted



yes. Because the language of instruction is spoken language, the vocabulary building and auditory skills work doesn't need to be done in speech therapy. The kids listen all day long.
Click to expand...

Forcing them to use their weakest sense for something as important as getting an education. Disgusting.
 
Dixie said:
With me being D/HH and raised completely oral and mainstreamed, I hated it. I hated being the lone kid on the playground, the lone girl getting shoved around in the hallways, the lone senior at graduation.

I feel like I would have benefited if I had the proper support system. Sometimes I wonder if I had fared better at ASD. However, my parents refuse to learn a second language of any sort so therefore, I never had any exposure to ASL other than finger spelling which I learned on my own from books at school. If I had been dropped right into ASD with no knowledge of ASL - I would still have been lost in communication.

I wished I had some kind of bi-bi approach to my education. Not sure if this would have even been feasible as at the time I was the only D/HH student at my school.
Click to expand...

Knowing how bright you are, you would have picked up with ASL like within a year.
 
jillio said:
Forcing them to use their weakest sense for something as important as getting an education. Disgusting.
Click to expand...

Agreed!!!!! It's exactly like the way, I have mild hypotonia. (low muscle tone) I CAN do most things, but things like fine motor is very hard for me. I can type and print faster then I can handwrite. Despite that, they STILL insisted that handwriting was the way I needed to write.I was even in Resource Room for it. No matter that with handwriting I was expending all my energy in forming the letters. With printing and typing, I can concentrate more on producing CONTENT and get my thoughts and ideas out faster and more sophiscated. Sound familiar?
There is nothing wrong with teaching speech and auditory training and all those other hoh style interventions. But they shouldn't be the be all and the end all of a dhh kid's education. They're a useful skill yeah........but as the education of hoh kids has shown, there hasn't been a HUGE uptick in student acheivement. Remember hoh kids are the most mainstreamed and most oral of the deaf population.......
 
jillio said:
Bingo. Essentially it is day long speech.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly. An oral education (and the end result) is an eternal speech therapy session. Oral skills rock, BUT the question is why a dhh kid should have to live life as an eternal speech therapy session? Many kids can hear and speak well yes....Heck, I'm one of them. But dhh kids cannot fully function as hearing and speaking people the way a hearing person can. Even the kids who have decent vocab and syntax, still struggle with enunciation, and remembering how to pronounce stuff, and all that stuff like moduation and pitch and volumne.
 
Back
Top