Article : vocabulary growth in toddlers

jillio

New Member
Oh, I am certain that you can find many of my spelling errors, big whoop!

What you will never find is me telling anyone that there is only one way to raise a deaf child.

Fond of games, sure I love to play hackey sack every now and then, don't you? You know I heard that it is a great substitute for CART services, did you know that?
Your ignorance is showing again, rick. Why is it you only respond to posts in which you think sarcasm is an effective reply? Why is it you never respond to posts that would actually require an intelligent response?
 

rick48

New Member
No, that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that these factors can mitigate some of the disadvantages in strictly oral programs in the mainstream. Unfortunately, this is not the norm at the mainstreamed public school. It is, however, the norm at deaf schools.
At the deaf school our daughter would have had to attend, the graduating class would have been less than 25 ( and that is being charitable), hardly an opportunity to experience the diversity of the student population in our SD which our daughter was able to experience.

"Disadvantages of a strictly oral program in the mainstream" maybe in your case but not in our case, but again each child is different and my daughter never wanted to be solely with deaf people. She enjoys being with both her hearing and her deaf friends often together.

Viva la difference!
 

rick48

New Member
Like I said...where you think sarcasm will work. You are still refusing to address the issues. Come on rick, give us benefit of your wonderous insight.
OK, I think its about time that the National League adopted the DH, don't you?
 

jillio

New Member
At the deaf school our daughter would have had to attend, the graduating class would have been less than 25 ( and that is being charitable), hardly an opportunity to experience the diversity of the student population in our SD which our daughter was able to experience.

"Disadvantages of a strictly oral program in the mainstream" maybe in your case but not in our case, but again each child is different and my daughter never wanted to be solely with deaf people. She enjoys being with both her hearing and her deaf friends often together.

Viva la difference!
Well, see, I'm going to have to disagree with you on the diversity issue. At my son's deaf school, which had a graduating class aorund 25 as well, that class included a student from Iran and one from Africa. It also included CI users and non CI users. It included kids who had some oral skill, kids who had no oral skills, and kids who had excellent oral skills. School wide, as this school provided educational services for pre-school through high school, there were deaf kids with CI, muli-handicapped deaf kids, kids from culturally Asian homes, kids from culturally Black homes, kids from Muslim homes, kids with hearing parents, kids with deaf parents, Deaf teachers who used voice, Deaf teachers who didn't use voice, hearing teachers who were native signers, hearing teachers who were not native signers and I could go on and on. How heck of a lot of diversity going on there.

Regarding hte deaf and the hearing associating together....my son's school also adopted a sister public school where ASL was being taught as an elective. The hearing students and the deaf students not only hung out together, but arranged group functions together, etc.

On the whole, I'd say that is a much more diverse atmosphere.

So, let me make sure I understand. You are saying that there are some cases of deaf students who experience no disadvantages of being mainstreamed in an orally based program with all hearing students? And, if that is what you are saying, could you please elaborate?
 

shel90

Audist are not welcome
Premium Member
Well, see, I'm going to have to disagree with you on the diversity issue. At my son's deaf school, which had a graduating class aorund 25 as well, that class included a student from Iran and one from Africa. It also included CI users and non CI users. It included kids who had some oral skill, kids who had no oral skills, and kids who had excellent oral skills. School wide, as this school provided educational services for pre-school through high school, there were deaf kids with CI, muli-handicapped deaf kids, kids from culturally Asian homes, kids from culturally Black homes, kids from Muslim homes, kids with hearing parents, kids with deaf parents, Deaf teachers who used voice, Deaf teachers who didn't use voice, hearing teachers who were native signers, hearing teachers who were not native signers and I could go on and on. How heck of a lot of diversity going on there.

Regarding hte deaf and the hearing associating together....my son's school also adopted a sister public school where ASL was being taught as an elective. The hearing students and the deaf students not only hung out together, but arranged group functions together, etc.

On the whole, I'd say that is a much more diverse atmosphere.

So, let me make sure I understand. You are saying that there are some cases of deaf students who experience no disadvantages of being mainstreamed in an orally based program with all hearing students? And, if that is what you are saying, could you please elaborate?
I know exactly what u r talking about!!! That's one of my favorite things to talk about...cultural knowledge and diversity. I went to Arizona State, population arouind 45,000 students but only met mostly white girls who grew up in AZ. Went to Gally, population around 2,000 students and befriended people from Brazil, Peru, Russia, Korea, Japan, Philippines, various countries from Europe, Canada, Pakistan, Negeria, South Africa and a few more. Due to all of them knowing ASL, I was able to learn about all the different cultures easily as opposed if I was in a spoken environment and missing out what others shared. So as a result, I became more knowledgeable about culture at the DEAF college than at the HEARING college. Go figure, huh?

Heck, at my 28th bday party, I had friends from Peru, Brazil, Russia, and a few other countries. We had a potluck and each of my friends brought dishes that were popular in their counties. It was so awesome!! That was my most memoral bday party ever and so much more precious than my 13th, 16th, 18th and 21st bday parties combined. My bday parties growing up had only white hearing American friends whom left me out most of the time anyway. LOL!

At my deaf school, we got kids from South America, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, and Korea. Some staff were from other counties.

It is not the quantity that matters..it is the quality. :)
 

jillio

New Member
I know exactly what u r talking about!!! That's one of my favorite things to talk about...cultural knowledge and diversity. I went to Arizona State, population arouind 45,000 students but only met mostly white girls who grew up in AZ. Went to Gally, population around 2,000 students and befriended people from Brazil, Peru, Russia, Korea, Japan, Philippines, various countries from Europe, Canada, Pakistan, Negeria, South Africa and a few more. Due to all of them knowing ASL, I was able to learn about all the different cultures easily as opposed if I was in a spoken environment and missing out what others shared. So as a result, I became more knowledgeable about culture at the DEAF college than at the HEARING college. Go figure, huh?

Heck, at my 28th bday party, I had friends from Peru, Brazil, Russia, and a few other countries. We had a potluck and each of my friends brought dishes that were popular in their counties. It was so awesome!! That was my most memoral bday party ever and so much more precious than my 13th, 16th, 18th and 21st bday parties combined. My bday parties growing up had only white hearing American friends whom left me out most of the time anyway. LOL!

At my deaf school, we got kids from South America, Russia, Pakistan, Iran, and Korea. Some staff were from other counties.

It is not the quantity that matters..it is the quality. :)
Exactly. And suburban mainstream is not generally where you will find a lot of diversity. And like you, I have found diversity to be an enriching experience.
 

rick48

New Member
"Deaf teachers who used voice, Deaf teachers who didn't use voice, hearing teachers who were native signers, hearing teachers who were not native signers..."

Those are not examples of diversity. Do you notice that virtually everything you listed revolved around deafness?

"...and I could go on and on."


Oh Lordy, don't we all know that!

I'm sorry that I did not provide a demorgraphic breakdown of my daughter's class along race, culture, income, religion, disabilities, left-handed vs. right-handed, Yankees fans vs. Mets fans, etc. I did not know it was required, next time I will remember. I think the point that most normal people get is that there is a greater probability of diversity in a class of 109 versus a class of less than 25. A school of over 400 versus one less than 100.

"On the whole, I'd say that is a much more diverse atmosphere."

That is your opinion, however since you do not know my daughter's school, that conclusion is meaningless. Also I was not even comparing her high school to your son's so your point is absurb.

I think we all know that St. Rita's is the finest high school in the country because you chose it for your son. And make no mistake about it, when all is said is done, it is really all about you.

"So, let me make sure I understand. You are saying that there are some cases of deaf students who experience no disadvantages of being mainstreamed in an orally based program with all hearing students?"

No.
 

rick48

New Member
Exactly. And suburban mainstream is not generally where you will find a lot of diversity. And like you, I have found diversity to be an enriching experience.
That's funny as the starting 5 on my younger daughter's PAL basketball team consisted of her, two girls of single moms from Peru and Mexico, the daughter of a CEO of a major corporation and the daughter of an NFL quarterback.

Just your typical whitebread suburban team, but you know it all, of course.
 

jillio

New Member
"Deaf teachers who used voice, Deaf teachers who didn't use voice, hearing teachers who were native signers, hearing teachers who were not native signers..."

Those are not examples of diversity. Do you notice that virtually everything you listed revolved around deafness?
Since when is being from Africa or Iran, or have CP revolving around deafness? And, since my son is deaf, his life revolves around deafness, as does your deaf daughter's. They certainly can't choose not to be deaf, now can they?"...and I could go on and on."


Oh Lordy, don't we all know that!

I'm sorry that I did not provide a demorgraphic breakdown of my daughter's class along race, culture, income, religion, disabilities, left-handed vs. right-handed, Yankees fans vs. Mets fans, etc. I did not know it was required, next time I will remember. I think the point that most normal people get is that there is a greater probability of diversity in a class of 109 versus a class of less than 25. A school of over 400 versus one less than 100.

You're the one that brought up the issue of diversity, rick. Now that you have been shown that your statements are in error, you revert to the childish attempts to divert the topic again.

"On the whole, I'd say that is a much more diverse atmosphere."

Are you saying that a multi cultural atmosphere is not more diverse than a uni cultural atmosphere?

That is your opinion, however since you do not know my daughter's school, that conclusion is meaningless. Also I was not even comparing her high school to your son's so your point is absurb.

You were comparing the deaf schools to the hearing placement in diverstiy issues. And shel and I have both demonstrated where your assumptions regarding diversity were incorrect. Grow up and accept that you have jsut been taught something, if you will only allow it to sink into that thick skull of yours.

I think we all know that St. Rita's is the finest high school in the country because you chose it for your son. And make no mistake about it, when all is said is done, it is really all about you.

No rick, you cannot apply the same stndards to me as you do to yourself. You operate from that egocentric perspective. I do not.
"So, let me make sure I understand. You are saying that there are some cases of deaf students who experience no disadvantages of being mainstreamed in an orally based program with all hearing students?"

No.
Good. Then we agree that all deaf students in an oral mainstream placement suffer some negative consequences that are the direct result of that placement choice. And if that is so, then it is the parent's responsibility to accept those negative consequences along with the positive.
 

rick48

New Member
Good. Then we agree that all deaf students in an oral mainstream placement suffer some negative consequences that are the direct result of that placement choice. And if that is so, then it is the parent's responsibility to accept those negative consequences along with the positive.

No, I think ALL students in ANY academic setting suffer some negative consequences. If you had more than one child, you might have realized that. However, the nature of those negative consequences and the degree to which they impact the child's over all academic and social growth, if at all, is a matter of degree and needs to be assessed on an individual basis.

I do agree that parents need to accept the consequences for their decisions, that's why we admit we made the cochlear implant decision for her and not try to pass it along by saying she could make the choice when she gets older. That's why we do not look to the educators or "hearing professionals" to make our decisions for our children--we make them.
 

jillio

New Member
No, I think ALL students in ANY academic setting suffer some negative consequences. If you had more than one child, you might have realized that. However, the nature of those negative consequences and the degree to which they impact the child's over all academic and social growth, if at all, is a matter of degree and needs to be assessed on an individual basis.

I do agree that parents need to accept the consequences for their decisions, that's why we admit we made the cochlear implant decision for her and not try to pass it along by saying she could make the choice when she gets older. That's why we do not look to the educators or "hearing professionals" to make our decisions for our children--we make them.
Once again, good. Then you will agree that when a parent makes the decision to place a child in an oral environment, and then encounters difficulties based on that decision, they are the ones responsible. And passing ahe decision to the child is not a defelction or a refusal to accept consequences. It is a moral and ethical statement regarding the nature of the individual and the nature of deafness.

Ahh, but as this discussion is regarding the negative consequences in placement of a deaf child, negative consequences a applied to children not requiring asccommodation for hearing loss is not an issue. That would be another subject entirely.
 

rick48

New Member
Once again, good. Then you will agree that when a parent makes the decision to place a child in an oral environment, and then encounters difficulties based on that decision, they are the ones responsible. "

Yes, just as a parent who places a child in a deaf school is responsibile for the difficulties that the child encounters based upon that decision.

Why do you have the compelling need to limit the parent's responsibilities solely to an oral environment?

Is it you position that there are no negative consequences associated with an education in a school for the deaf?


"And passing ahe decision to the child is not a defelction or a refusal to accept consequences. It is a moral and ethical statement regarding the nature of the individual and the nature of deafness.


Sounds nice and may assuage your conscience, but it is passing the buck all the same. You are the parent, you have the responsibility to make decisions that are in your child's best interests and if you choose not to make a decision then that is your responsibility as well.


"Ahh, but as this discussion is regarding the negative consequences in placement of a deaf child, negative consequences a applied to children not requiring asccommodation for hearing loss is not an issue. That would be another subject entirely.
Sorry, did not see the sign posted limiting the discussion, and BTW that has never stopped you before. If you are bothered by it, why not just report me to the off-topic police?
 

jillio

New Member
Absolutely. And to date, my son has received only benefits, as opposed to the difficulties he experienced in the mainsteam. And another difference would be that I do not ask anyone to take responsibility for the decision that I make. I accept all the consequences, both negative and positive. There are those in this forum, however, that are attempting to make an entire school system responsible for their decisions.

I never said that parental responsibility extended to an oral environment only. What I said was that any decision a parent makes regarding educational placement has pros and cons, and therefore, when that decision is made, the parent must accept both. It is only become an oral discussion, becasue it would appear to be those that have chosen an oral palcement are the ones that are complaining and whining about the negatives of their decisions.

Yep, you are right. And it was my decision that my child had the right to choose for himself if he wanted or needed to undergo CI surgery. That was in the best interest of my child. Time has already proven that fact. So how is it that I am attempting to assuage my conscience? I have nothing to feel guilty for.

You, on the other hand, with your constant and ever present attempt to justify your decision, are exhibiting all of the classic symptoms of using agression to justify that of which you are unsure. I have no need to justify my decision to allow my son to choose for himself. You, however, are constantly justifying the fact that you made the decison for your daughter. So stop projecting your psychological adjustment and guilt issues onto everyone else and deal with them yourself.

And if you want to discuss educational placement for hearing children, I would suggest doing so in an appropriate forum. Last time I checked, this was AllDeaf.
 

Cloggy

New Member
Once again, good. Then you will agree that when a parent makes the decision to place a child in an oral environment, and then encounters difficulties based on that decision, they are the ones responsible. And passing ahe decision to the child is not a defelction or a refusal to accept consequences. It is a moral and ethical statement regarding the nature of the individual and the nature of deafness.........


I so agree with you - scary!!!

Then you will agree that when a parent makes the decision to place a child in an sign environment, and then encounters difficulties based on that decision, they are the ones responsible. And passing the decision to the child is not a deflection or a refusal to accept consequences. It is a moral and ethical statement regarding the nature of the individual and the nature of deafness
 

shel90

Audist are not welcome
Premium Member
Yes, children face difficulties in any educational setting...however to allow deaf children to be language delayed, miss out on concepts being taught, allow them to struggle to keep up with classroom discussions resulting in poor literacy skills or resulting in sending them to deaf schools at 6, 7,8 and older being several years delayed that teachers at the deaf schools have more pressure put on them to do so much remedial work. With that additional pressure placed on teachers and the children usually ends up frustating everyone involved.

I don't think those are not your everyday "difficulities" that all children face. Hearing children don't have those issues but it seems ok to allow those issues to happen to many dhh children cuz the parents and educators were "trying out" different methods to see which one works. I guess that is acceptable to many but it is the children who end up paying the heavy price later on. Too many years lost and wasted which is completely preventable and uneccessary. Whatever happened to providing fair and appropraie education for all children?
 

jillio

New Member
I so agree with you - scary!!!

Then you will agree that when a parent makes the decision to place a child in an sign environment, and then encounters difficulties based on that decision, they are the ones responsible. And passing the decision to the child is not a deflection or a refusal to accept consequences. It is a moral and ethical statement regarding the nature of the individual and the nature of deafness
I've already confirmed that, cloggy. Would you like me to put it in sign language font?
 

jillio

New Member
Yes, children face difficulties in any educational setting...however to allow deaf children to be language delayed, miss out on concepts being taught, allow them to struggle to keep up with classroom discussions resulting in poor literacy skills or resulting in sending them to deaf schools at 6, 7,8 and older being several years delayed that teachers at the deaf schools have more pressure put on them to do so much remedial work. With that additional pressure placed on teachers and the children usually ends up frustating everyone involved.

I don't think those are not your everyday "difficulities" that all children face. Hearing children don't have those issues but it seems ok to allow those issues to happen to many dhh children cuz the parents and educators were "trying out" different methods to see which one works. I guess that is acceptable to many but it is the children who end up paying the heavy price later on. Too many years lost and wasted which is completely preventable and uneccessary. Whatever happened to providing fair and appropraie education for all children?
Exactly. If you put commication mode (i.e. oral only) as the first priorty, rather than making sure that the child can communicate fully in some mode, you create educational problems for the child. We have discussed this at length in another (guess where!) thread. When a child's early acadmeic career, hell, their entire early childhood, for that matter, is spent concentrating on speaking and some form of auditory perception, and making up for the deficits in pronunciation and auditory gaps, time is lost in educating the child. Then that kid hits 5th or 6th grade, and they can speak, and perhaps are skilled in using residual hearing, but they have missed academic content as a result, andthey can't read,they can't write, they have no idea how to use English grammar, and all of their other academic skills are behind. Is it because they are deaf? No. It's because they have been restricted to an oral environment. I don't know about you, but I would much rather have a well educated signing kid than a very poorly educated speaking kid. The education will take them farther than the oral skills.

The sad fact of the matter, that for the deaf children of hearing parents, it allcomes down to the parent's priorty. And far too often the priorty is on speech production and creating some form of hearing in the child rather than on true education that will allow that child to become a fully functioning deaf adult in a hearing world.

But here's the kicker. These same parents want to blame the schools for the fact that their child is missing academic content, or they blame the fact that the child is deaf. It is neither one of those. It is the oral choice of the parent that is responsibile. I
 

Cloggy

New Member
I've already confirmed that, cloggy. Would you like me to put it in sign language font?
Oh yes please...... That would be a first !!

But start a topic with it, because that would be great !

Here's the text again... please put it in signlanguage.. looking forward to that.

Then you will agree that when a parent makes the decision to place a child in an sign environment, and then encounters difficulties based on that decision, they are the ones responsible. And passing the decision to the child is not a deflection or a refusal to accept consequences. It is a moral and ethical statement regarding the nature of the individual and the nature of deafness.


Thanks for sharing that idea !
 
Top