Is it ever ok for kids NOT to use ASL? - Page 15

faire_jour · 02-11-2009, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

I see. but as said by many - ASL was their first language and Oral was their 2nd which was acquired later on. Looks like they are doing just fine... and right.

No, the majority of CI users don't use ASL. The 3 years is an auditory only time table.

**Jiro** · 02-11-2009, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

No, the majority of CI users don't use ASL. The 3 years is an auditory only time table.

For hearings, si?

jillio · 02-11-2009, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daredevel7

Sometimes stereotypes come from somewhere.....the truth hurts.

Are YOU a typical parent, Jillio? I am guessing not.

Just because it can happen doesnt mean it usually does. Same concept applies for oralism. Sometimes it works, doesnt mean it usually does.

I'd say I'm pretty typical. And I'd say his performance is pretty typical. At least, when compared to the students he went to school with. I saw deaf kids accomplish the same things he accomplished on a daily basis there. And, they all had at least one parent that signed fluently. Most had hearing sibs that did as well.

It is not the fault of ASL that it doesn't usually happen. It is the inconsistencies in use. That certainly has nothing to do with the language.

**Jiro** · 02-11-2009, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

ScienceDirect - International Congress Series : Educational intervention and outcomes of early cochlear implantation

"Principal components analysis was used to create composite factor scores for each outcome. Children who consistently used oral communication exhibited a significant advantage over those who used total communication in all outcomes. Outcomes that were affected by pre-implant and early educational placements included speech perception and oral language. Speech production and reading outcomes were not predicted by educational placement until 2 or more years following cochlear implantation and may reflect cochlear implant benefits. Results indicate that communication mode both affects and reflects outcomes of cochlear implantation"

interesting but possibly misleading. That's just an abstract. Gotta read the whole detail including factors, variables, circumstances, etc. before coming to conclusion. However - methinks this "finding" is funded by CI company. I prefer if the paper is published from well-known medical community.

jillio · 02-11-2009, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

No, the majority of CI users don't use ASL. The 3 years is an auditory only time table.

Where do you get this stuff? From the CI Circle and a some parent that hasn't ventured outside their own little world?

jillio · 02-11-2009, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

ScienceDirect - International Congress Series : Educational intervention and outcomes of early cochlear implantation

"Principal components analysis was used to create composite factor scores for each outcome. Children who consistently used oral communication exhibited a significant advantage over those who used total communication in all outcomes. Outcomes that were affected by pre-implant and early educational placements included speech perception and oral language. Speech production and reading outcomes were not predicted by educational placement until 2 or more years following cochlear implantation and may reflect cochlear implant benefits. Results indicate that communication mode both affects and reflects outcomes of cochlear implantation"

Advances in the Spoken Language ... - Google Book Search

You are googling and coming up with abstracts. Results cannot be evaluated through an abstract. Trying to support your claims this way is not going to work. You need to actually read the research, Faire_jour, not just google up an abstract.

faire_jour · 02-11-2009, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Where do you get this stuff? From the CI Circle and a some parent that hasn't ventured outside their own little world?

More than half are under 18, and we all know that 90% of deaf children are in an oral or mainstream setting. Also, a large portion are post lingually deafen adults. That would mean a very small portion are like my daughter.

jillio · 02-11-2009, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

interesting but possibly misleading. That's just an abstract. Gotta read the whole detail including factors, variables, circumstances, etc. before coming to conclusion. However - methinks this "finding" is funded by CI company. I prefer if the paper is published from well-known medical community.

Exactly.

faire_jour · 02-11-2009, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

You are googling and coming up with abstracts. Results cannot be evaluated through an abstract. Trying to support your claims this way is not going to work. You need to actually read the research, Faire_jour, not just google up an abstract.

The second link is to the inside of a book. It has the numbers you need.

jillio · 02-11-2009, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

More than half are under 18, and we all know that 90% of deaf children are in an oral or mainstream setting. Also, a large portion are post lingually deafen adults. That would mean a very small portion are like my daughter.

What point are you trying to make?

faire_jour · 02-11-2009, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

What point are you trying to make?

That since half are oral kids and there are postlingual adults, the majority would not be using ASL.

**Daredevel7** · 02-11-2009, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I'd say I'm pretty typical. And I'd say his performance is pretty typical. At least, when compared to the students he went to school with. I saw deaf kids accomplish the same things he accomplished on a daily basis there. And, they all had at least one parent that signed fluently. Most had hearing sibs that did as well.

It is not the fault of ASL that it doesn't usually happen. It is the inconsistencies in use. That certainly has nothing to do with the language.

Okay.. first you said a lot of parents of deaf children don't even bother knowing ASL. And now you're saying that you're a typical parent knowing sign fluently....

In your experience... parents of deaf children, do MOST of them know ASL or not?

faire_jour · 02-11-2009, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daredevel7

Okay.. first you said a lot of parents of deaf children don't even bother knowing ASL. And now you're saying that you're a typical parent knowing sign fluently....

In your experience... parents of deaf children, do MOST of them know ASL or not?

I've heard the number is less than 10%.

**Jiro** · 02-11-2009, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

More than half are under 18, and we all know that 90% of deaf children are in an oral or mainstream setting. Also, a large portion are post lingually deafen adults. That would mean a very small portion are like my daughter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

I've heard the number is less than 10%.

where are you getting those figures??

jillio · 02-11-2009, 10:07 PM

Thus, there was a significant difference between the hearing children and the children with Cls on the AMP-E scores (p < .001). The mean AMP-E score of then congenitally deaf children (3.9) was significantly lower than the mean score of the prelingually deaf children (4.7; p= .01). The peak scoring differences between the CI students and the normal-hearing children
in elementary school were seen in questions on communication breakdown, engagement in group discussion, and displaying turn-taking abilities or
a leadership role.
Damen et al. (2006). Cochlear implanls in mainstream education. Annals of Otology, Laryngology, & Rhinology. 115(7):542-552.

jillio · 02-11-2009, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daredevel7

Okay.. first you said a lot of parents of deaf children don't even bother knowing ASL. And now you're saying that you're a typical parent knowing sign fluently....

In your experience... parents of deaf children, do MOST of them know ASL or not?

The majority of hearing parents do not learn sign in any form. That does not make the ones who do atypical parents, as there are still a significant number of us.

**Jiro** · 02-11-2009, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Thus, there was a significant difference between the hearing children and the children with Cls on the AMP-E scores (p < .001). The mean AMP-E score of then congenitally deaf children (3.9) was significantly lower than the mean score of the prelingually deaf children (4.7; p= .01). The peak scoring differences between the CI students and the normal-hearing children
in elementary school were seen in questions on communication breakdown, engagement in group discussion, and displaying turn-taking abilities or
a leadership role.
Damen et al. (2006). Cochlear implanls in mainstream education. Annals of Otology, Laryngology, & Rhinology. 115(7):542-552.

:scratch: so.... in english.......

jillio · 02-11-2009, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

That since half are oral kids and there are postlingual adults, the majority would not be using ASL.

Fallcious reasoning. Postlingual adults can and do use ASL.

faire_jour · 02-11-2009, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Fallcious reasoning. Postlingual adults can and do use ASL.

So you believe thaat the majority of CI users use ASL?

jillio · 02-11-2009, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

The second link is to the inside of a book. It has the numbers you need.

A book you have never read. Really, faire_jour, if you are going to attempt to use research to support your points, you need to have at least read what you are using. If you haven't, you have no idea whether it truly supports your point or not.

jillio · 02-11-2009, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

:scratch: so.... in english.......

CI users are functioning significantly below their hearing peers academically and psycho-socially, when placed in an oral only environment. And these were the results at elementary age. The gap has been shown to widen as the kids get older.

jillio · 02-11-2009, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

So you believe thaat the majority of CI users use ASL?

Where exactly did I say that?

**Daredevel7** · 02-11-2009, 10:21 PM

Yea, I'm gonna give my brain a rest......

Simply put, I don't think ASL should be MANDATORY, just as oralism shouldn't be mandatory.

chris' mom · 02-11-2009, 10:42 PM

not sure if this is on topic or not. But I have question to ask. Am I wrong in keeping my child in his normal public school, with his HA and FM system along with Speech therapy and an interpeter? His teacher and I have currently talked and reliezed that he's better at learning signs and then picking up the verbal. We all use sign and we all use verbal. I am also signed up to take a Signing class in APril

jillio · 02-11-2009, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris' mom

not sure if this is on topic or not. But I have question to ask. Am I wrong in keeping my child in his normal public school, with his HA and FM system along with Speech therapy and an interpeter? His teacher and I have currently talked and reliezed that he's better at learning signs and then picking up the verbal. We all use sign and we all use verbal. I am also signed up to take a Signing class in APril

I wouldn't say you are wrong. The important thing is that you continue to use an interpreter so that he is able to get the information in the mode he most readily comprehends. Later on, social issues may become something you will need to consider, if he is the only deaf child in the classroom

jillio · 02-11-2009, 11:06 PM

The language of 7 children who had used a cochlear implant for 5 years was evaluated by means of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-3, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised, and the Expressive Vocabulary Subtest of the Test of Word Knowledge. All subjects demonstrated impaired skills relative to normal-hearing children on 1 or more subtests. Variability in performance accurred between subjects and within subjects across subtests. Strengths in semantic skills were evident compared to weaker syntactic and morphological abilities. The findings support the need for further evaluation of the rate and course of development of language subskills. Investigation of the influences of information processing, and learning styles and strategies, on children's outcomes is also warranted. These findings have implications for implementation of optimal habilitation and education programs for children with cochlear implants.

Young, G. & Killen, D. (2002). Receptive and expressive language skills of children with five years of experience using a cochlear implant. Annals of Otolarngology, Rhinology, & Laryngoglogy 111, 802-810.

**Bottesini** · 02-11-2009, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

The language of 7 children who had used a cochlear implant for 5 years was evaluated by means of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-3, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised, and the Expressive Vocabulary Subtest of the Test of Word Knowledge. All subjects demonstrated impaired skills relative to normal-hearing children on 1 or more subtests. Variability in performance accurred between subjects and within subjects across subtests. Strengths in semantic skills were evident compared to weaker syntactic and morphological abilities. The findings support the need for further evaluation of the rate and course of development of language subskills. Investigation of the influences of information processing, and learning styles and strategies, on children's outcomes is also warranted. These findings have implications for implementation of optimal habilitation and education programs for children with cochlear implants.

Young, G. & Killen, D. (2002). Receptive and expressive language skills of children with five years of experience using a cochlear implant. Annals of Otolarngology, Rhinology, & Laryngoglogy 111, 802-810.

Nobody here to argue with you. Lest you feel lonely, I will say I wonder if someone who is arguing for the all aural approach with a CI kid knows any older kids with CI.

I do know young adults who are friends of my children, and they absolutely are not like hearing people.

Jillio, just in case anybody thinks I am guilty of what all here were charged with.

jillio · 02-11-2009, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bottesini

Nobody here to argue with you. Lest you feel lonely, I will say I wonder if someone who is arguing for the all aural approach with a CI kid knows any older kids with CI.

I do know young adults who are friends of my children, and they absolutely are not like hearing people.

Jillio, just in case anybody thinks I am guilty of what all here were charged with.

OUCH! **jillio rubbing the back of her head.**

Actually, I'm not trying to provoke an argument...just substaniating my points.

**Bottesini** · 02-11-2009, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

OUCH! **jillio rubbing the back of her head.**

Actually, I'm not trying to provoke an argument...just substaniating my points.

I know. Just supporting you, in an argumentative style.

***naisho*** · 02-11-2009, 11:14 PM

Botti for

Jillio

(reason: eye for an eye!)

02-11-2009, 10:42 PM	#444 (permalink)
chris' mom Registered User Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Fayetteville, AR Posts: 975	not sure if this is on topic or not. But I have question to ask. Am I wrong in keeping my child in his normal public school, with his HA and FM system along with Speech therapy and an interpeter? His teacher and I have currently talked and reliezed that he's better at learning signs and then picking up the verbal. We all use sign and we all use verbal. I am also signed up to take a Signing class in APril __________________ Lori & Sons Children are a gift from the Lord, indeed, they are a blessing.

02-11-2009, 11:14 PM	#450 (permalink)
*naisho* Forum Disorders M.D.,Ph.D Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 127.0.0.1 Posts: 6,162	Botti for Jillio (reason: eye for an eye!) __________________

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

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

02-11-2009, 10:07 PM	#435 (permalink)
jillio Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 60,296	Thus, there was a significant difference between the hearing children and the children with Cls on the AMP-E scores (p < .001). The mean AMP-E score of then congenitally deaf children (3.9) was significantly lower than the mean score of the prelingually deaf children (4.7; p= .01). The peak scoring differences between the CI students and the normal-hearing children in elementary school were seen in questions on communication breakdown, engagement in group discussion, and displaying turn-taking abilities or a leadership role. Damen et al. (2006). Cochlear implanls in mainstream education. Annals of Otology, Laryngology, & Rhinology. 115(7):542-552.

02-11-2009, 10:21 PM	#443 (permalink)
Daredevel7 Adrenaline Junky Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 4,341	Yea, I'm gonna give my brain a rest...... Simply put, I don't think ASL should be MANDATORY, just as oralism shouldn't be mandatory.

02-11-2009, 11:06 PM	#446 (permalink)
jillio Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 60,296	The language of 7 children who had used a cochlear implant for 5 years was evaluated by means of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-3, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised, and the Expressive Vocabulary Subtest of the Test of Word Knowledge. All subjects demonstrated impaired skills relative to normal-hearing children on 1 or more subtests. Variability in performance accurred between subjects and within subjects across subtests. Strengths in semantic skills were evident compared to weaker syntactic and morphological abilities. The findings support the need for further evaluation of the rate and course of development of language subskills. Investigation of the influences of information processing, and learning styles and strategies, on children's outcomes is also warranted. These findings have implications for implementation of optimal habilitation and education programs for children with cochlear implants. Young, G. & Killen, D. (2002). Receptive and expressive language skills of children with five years of experience using a cochlear implant. Annals of Otolarngology, Rhinology, & Laryngoglogy 111, 802-810.