shel90

If these teachers r conducting AVT in the classroom when they r supposed to be teaching the curriculm, their certification should be revoked cuz that's unethical.

__________________
"Wine improves with age. The older I get, the better I like it."

--- Anonymous

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

faire_jour

AVT is integrated into every moment of everyday. They provide a language rich enviroment to teach children to learn to listen. They are "doing AVT" every time they open their mouths.

jillio

Well,since faire jour has chosen not to answer the question, "What does the "T" in AVT stand for?", I will answer it. It stands for therapy. AVT is a therapuetic technique intended to remediate deficiencies and delays in auditory and verbal functioning. It is not a subject included in a classroom curriculum. Academic subjects make up a curriculum. Therapy is not an academic subject. Therapy is not a teaching methodology.

And doing therapy is not teaching the curriculum. Speech therapy of any kind, auditory therapy of any kind is not an academic subject that composes the curriculum of the school, the classroom, the school system, and the state mandates.

If you want your child to be in an oral only environment, then put her in one. You cannot force a BiBi program to become an oral program for your child only. There are oral programs available. Use them if that is what you want, and stop trying to change the BiBi program into an oral program.

jillio

Exactly. AVT is therapy. It has absolutely nothing to do with teaching the curriculum to state standards.

jillio

Yes, yes, and yes. How about you?

jillio

Deleted. See below.

jillio

Obviously, quite a bit more than yourself, as I am able to differentiate between a therapy that is an adjunct service, and the direct teaching of the curriculum.

Please, please show me, in any state in the United States, where the proficency test has a section for testing AVT skills in students. If it is not included on the state proficiency test, it is not a part of the curriculum.

faire_jour

I do apologize for my use of "AVT" instead of writing out "the principles and guidepost used in the educational philosophy know as the Auditory Verbal approach to educating deaf and hard of hearing children"

jillio

That would be an oral only environment. If that is what you want for your child, then enroll her in that program. You have no legal right to force a BiBi program to become an oral program simply for your convenience. You have a choice. Make it.

faire_jour

There are many bi-bi schools that have jearned the benefits of providing spoken language to deaf students. Maryland School for the Deaf is a good example. They have a CI program that uses spoken language from 50-90% of the classroom time. It doesn't mean that it isn't a bi-bi school. I have also heard about The Learning Center in Mass having a great bi-bi program that is still appropriate for CI users. Also, KDES and MSSD have a CI program. They are certainly considered bi-bi. http://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/Cle.../Services.html
Just because my school isn't doing it yet, doesn't mean it shouldn't.

faire_jour

When did this turn into an attack on my choices? I was discussing AV and AV teachers, not my daughter or our situation. Drop it.

Bottesini

Utah School for Deaf-Blind
Oral Departments
846 20th Street
Ogden, UT 84401
- AND -
Outreach
2870 Connor
Salt Lake City, UT 84109
(801) 468-0337
Birth - 21 y

Auditory Oral / Verbal Programs T-Z, Other Countries, and Global

Here is a program that is in your state.

__________________

faire_jour

I'm well aware of the oral program.

Bottesini

If nothing in your state meets your desire, I see the alternative to be move, or start a program.

__________________

Bottesini

Like waving a red flag before a bull.

__________________

faire_jour

Isn't it sad that if a parent wants an appropriate education for their child, they must move?

Bottesini

Understand, my father put most of his non working hours educating me and he never complained. He just did it so I would develop to my full potential.

I don't have any sympathy for you.

He never complained.

__________________

jillio

What you are asking your school to do is change the methodology of their program. You have no legal right to do that. Your daughter has a right to accommodation. You do not have the right to dictate methododolgy. The whole philosophy of bi-bi is founded on keeping 2 languages separate.

Any bi-bi program is appropriate for CI users. What is not appropriate for a bi-bi classroom is bringing AVT into a classroom that is taught using ASL. Having a CI is not a disability. Therefore, you cannot walk into a program designed to be bi-bi and for deaf children and demand that your child be given oral instruction because she has a CI. The accomodation for her being deaf has already been made. That is the disability that qualifies her for accommodation. If you don't want her in a classroom that uses sign as the language of instruction, then, quite simply, don't put her in one. Put her in a program that uses speech as the language of instruction.

And self contained CI programs within a deaf school are the same as a self contained program for deaf students in a mainstream school. They function differently than the rest of the school functions. And those self contained programs are created so that those students whose parent want a different methodology than the school's primary methodology have a separate classroom in which to accomplish that.

jillio

No.

faire_jour

Stop attacking me and my choices. This thread is NOT about my family. I will contact a moderator if it continues.

Jolie77

Mod's Note:

The thread is closed for the time being.

The thread will be undergoing a review.

__________________
Isaiah 33:6 - "He will be the sure foundation for your times, a rich store of salvation and wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the Lord is the key to this treasure."