Best way to develop oral skills?

[deafskeptic]

Bott! Can I join in? I can play the flute, violin and piano.

I don't think you'd want me he he.. I play the piano so badly people leave the room.

 

[Cheri]

Then I amend my statement. Most kindergartners are in class for less than 6 hours a day....they run 1/2 days.

Not all kindergartners are in class half of the day, (morning or afternoon) There is a full-day kindergarten. I know that for fact because my son was one of them, because of him being so young and didn't have pre-school before entering kindergarten they allow him to have a full day kindergarten.

 

[Hear Again]

I don't think you'd want me he he.. I play the piano so badly people leave the room.

 

[rick48]

I have no idea why this has turned into "Quiz Melissa on IQ testing", which I never claimed to know :roll:
But, you know what, I'm done.

I will talk about general threads, but my child is off limits.

Faire jour,

Don't let them bully you into stop providing information about your daughter's progress. It is exactly that type of information that parents researching the ci issue need to hear from other parents.

This is the same crap that is pulled all the time on other parents of ci kids. Ever wonder why virtually none of them ever post here?

Funny, but if you recall you were the greatest mother since sliced bread to a certain faction on this forum until you decided to give a cochlear implant to your daughter.

Hang in there you are tougher and definitely a better person!
Rick

 

[rick48]

Just to correct this. There are no oral state schools.....but there are Schools for the Deaf that have oral programs. Make sense now?
Faire_joure..........I hope I can be honest here. I know you have the best of intentions.....BUT I think you've been sucked into the thinking that you need to go all "stereotypical AG Bell family" with your daughter in order to get the most benifit from CI. That's understandable. Completely understandable. A lot of the pro oral and pro AVT stuff makes it sound like if a kid isn't in an intense program, they won't do as well as someone who isn't in that sort of program.
But what I think you're not quite understanding is that many of the kids who are VERY sucessful orally, are the oral version of those kids who are basicly "professional children" or they come from families where it's expected that they'll go to Name Brand University and become some high powered type.
You know.....the overprogrammed suburban type? And yes, Rick48 I know you don't think that....I know you're going to post about how most of the families you know through AG Bell are just average folks. All I can say is that you really are not reconizing your class privilage. I bet that the percentage of non upper middle class types in AG Bell is very small. Not saying that the input from a CI or HA isn't important......b/c it is. But quite a bit of the "oral sucess" seen in AG Bell isn't nessarily due to methodology......but rather that the demographic which can be overlly represented in the group tends to be very pro overprogramming children for sucess in life. I'm not bashing that lifestyle.......just saying that it does seem like a lot of the "sucess" may be due to the fact that it attracts families that view normal enrichement/extracurriculars as something that gives their kid an "edge"
As long as you have your kid in some sort of regular therapy with a qualified therapist she will develop oral abilty....She does not need to be in therapy 24/7. Give her time to be kid.....she'll pick up stuff without it being taught to her, just the way hoh kids do.

Actually, I have no need to make such a post as your disjointed rant proves my point exactly--you create these "class wars" where none exist. The biggest factor in any child's life are concerned and involved parents. You just do not get it.

 

[Daredevel7]

You know.....the overprogrammed suburban type? And yes, Rick48 I know you don't think that....I know you're going to post about how most of the families you know through AG Bell are just average folks. All I can say is that you really are not reconizing your class privilage. I bet that the percentage of non upper middle class types in AG Bell is very small. Not saying that the input from a CI or HA isn't important......b/c it is. But quite a bit of the "oral sucess" seen in AG Bell isn't nessarily due to methodology......but rather that the demographic which can be overlly represented in the group tends to be very pro overprogramming children for sucess in life. I'm not bashing that lifestyle.......just saying that it does seem like a lot of the "sucess" may be due to the fact that it attracts families that view normal enrichement/extracurriculars as something that gives their kid an "edge"

Doesn't the bolded sentence above kind of go against the idea that "some kids have the ability to have oral skills and some kids don't?"

 

[jillio]

Doesn't the bolded sentence above kind of go against the idea that "some kids have the ability to have oral skills and some kids don't?"

The way it is phrased it could certainly appear that way. But the demogrpahics that DD mentions certainly are at play, and the sociological concepts she is referring to do exist. But more important than the fact that members of A.G. Bell, by and large, will all have similar demographics unrelated directly to deafness, we also need to keep in mind that A.G. Bell doesn't tell anyone about the kids that weren't able to develop oral skills under their direction. They are infamous for presenting a rarely occurring exception as the rule. That is why it is so important that parents seek out other sources of information, especially those sources that will present empirical data regarding the number of children in an oral only program that experience educational, psycho-social and linguistic delays as a result.

 

[jillio]

Faire jour,

Don't let them bully you into stop providing information about your daughter's progress. It is exactly that type of information that parents researching the ci issue need to hear from other parents.

This is the same crap that is pulled all the time on other parents of ci kids. Ever wonder why virtually none of them ever post here?

Funny, but if you recall you were the greatest mother since sliced bread to a certain faction on this forum until you decided to give a cochlear implant to your daughter.

Hang in there you are tougher and definitely a better person!
Rick

Perhaps your perspective is a bit skewed, as you can see no further than a CI. It has absoultely nothing to do with CI or no CI. It is the result of a switch from a supportive attitude toward the deaf community and a fully accessable educational environment to a decidedly oral only focus. In fact, it began prior to FJ's daughter being implanted. There doesn't appear to be a correlation between oral only attitudes and a CI user, but there is definately a correlation between oral only attitudes and being the parent of a CI user.:roll: There also appears to be a direct correlation between being the parent of a CI user, and making outlandish claims that cannot be substantiated.

 

[jillio]

Not all kindergartners are in class half of the day, (morning or afternoon) There is a full-day kindergarten. I know that for fact because my son was one of them, because of him being so young and didn't have pre-school before entering kindergarten they allow him to have a full day kindergarten.

Pleasse refer back to post # 602.

 

[doubletrouble]

Faire Jour:

Here's the deal... At least the way I see it.... A deaf child ANY deaf child- implanted or not, is only as successful as the parental involvement. Are the extremes? Yes, I do know of some who put their kid in therapy 3 to 4 times a week and then innudate them with vocabulary afterward. Do I agree with that? HELL NO! Does my child see a private speech therapist aside from school? Yes, he sees her 1x a week- but it's not even for speech anymore- it's for language comphrension. Speech therapy went out the window when my son was 4 years old. Even now, with his recent re-implantation, it's not about the listening, as much as it is about the vocabulary. Do I consider my child to be a successful CI user? Yes, he is mainstreamed, above grade level, and speaks like you and I. He just got his first cell phone yesterday and can have conversations with on the phone without any assitive device. The speech part- to be quite honest- was not my focus at all. I just wanted him to be able to determine sounds around him. the fact that he is able to speak on a cell phone and have conversations with complete strangers is a bonus. We do not talk with our hands in front on our lips- he also is an awesome lip reader and I wouldn't take that skill away from him at all- and he does know sign. So- here's a kid with the full toolbox and I really think because of it, he is as successful as he is. THere was one very important factor is our decision to implant our child- that our child REMAIN a child- I have seen first hand how it can hinder a child if you go overboard. I'm not a member of AG Bell nor the NAD, just a parent like all of you, you are trying to do the best for my child. I don't think my child is any better than many of the CI kids that I know of around here- he's the norm. But that's just my experience. It sounds as if Miss Kat has a solid base of language and now it's time to work on the auditory listening skills- and that too- will phase out. You've given her the best of both worlds (in my opinion) and she'll be well adjusted for that.

 

[jillio]

we found that parents who did consider implants rated significantly higher the
child’s ability to speak over sign (P < 0.002).

Parents who considered implants assigned a 2.27 higher overall preference score to ‘‘oral success’’ than to ‘‘ASL success’’, while parents who did not consider implants assigned a significantly smaller contrast of 1.39 (t-test: P < 0.03).

Those parents assigned a 2.36 higher utility score to ‘‘oral success’’ than to ‘‘ASL success,’’ in the order closer to the preference of parents who were eligible and considered cochlear implants (t(52) = 0.76, P = 0.45) and significantly higher than eligible parents who did not consider implants(t(41) = 2.65, P < 0.02).


Parental goals in raising a deaf or hard-of-hearing child appear to be tangible and can be quantified by their preference for outcomes. It seems that
parental goals in considering the implant condensed into one main domain: parents’ aspirations regarding the child’s ability to communicate orally
Patients
often rely on their beliefs, attitudes, and values in guiding their decision-making, especially when definitive outcome data are scanty.

Relaxed eligibility criteria may magnify the increasingly important role of parents’ goals and aspirations for the child’s functional outcomes. Parents
of a profoundly deaf child may opt for an oral communication modality (and also a cochlear implant) because they prefer the implications of an
oral outcome
While a cochlear implant provides the ability to hear sounds, it does not ensure that a child will function as a hearing child. Deaf children present
varied and wide-ranging characteristics related to their age, history, progress, and development that will impact their degree of success with a
cochlear implant. While there may be some degree of benefit for all children obtaining a cochlear implant, it is important for those involved with the decision-making process to be realistic about the range of possible outcomes for any given child.

Li, Y, Baind, A.G, Steinberg, C.D. (2004). Parental decision-making in considering cochlear implant technology for a deaf child. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology.68, 1027—1038.

 

[naisho]

After all this discussions and stuff, I think honestly nothing has really changed.
Some readers are enlightened overall of the aspects behind developmental specifications of children at a young age and how it reflects their adulthood. I know I am. There are strong arguments behind every plausible focus.

I have nothing against Pro/Anti _____ (Speech, ASL, CI).

Ultimately this is how I see it; summed up from my own perspective. From page 1 to page 24..

Some people follow a standard guideline that has years of experience under the belt. It surpasses enough to make any deaf child get through the necessities required to become the average modern "educated" citizen; what the kid wants to do afterward is up to them. If you choose this route, there isn't much that can really go wrong.


If you want to make an exemption to get more out of your child by checking in with a new experimental/nonstandard ideology (by going against the majority opinion),
I honestly wish you the best of luck. It is really similar to the aspects of gambling.. you can win big or you can lose. If you want some support to feel positive behind your choice, don't look at me, I don't know about it.

No one knows what your kids want to do when they grow up. That's the ultimate factor that is the consequence behind all this.

(I think daredevel deserves some recognition of merit for making "one of the interesting discussions of AD of all time"

naisho: over, and out.

 

[rick48]

Perhaps your perspective is a bit skewed, as you can see no further than a CI. It has absoultely nothing to do with CI or no CI. It is the result of a switch from a supportive attitude toward the deaf community and a fully accessable educational environment to a decidedly oral only focus. In fact, it began prior to FJ's daughter being implanted. There doesn't appear to be a correlation between oral only attitudes and a CI user, but there is definately a correlation between oral only attitudes and being the parent of a CI user.:roll: There also appears to be a direct correlation between being the parent of a CI user, and making outlandish claims that cannot be substantiated.

Keep telling yourself that, I have no doubt you believe it to be true. Well I guess the correlation between oral only and ci parents is higher than that of sign only and ci parents, when you are right, you are right!

 

[jillio]

Keep telling yourself that, I have no doubt you believe it to be true. Well I guess the correlation between oral only and ci parents is higher than that of sign only and ci parents, when you are right, you are right!

Given the nature of the population, there is no such thing as "sign only."

 

[rick48]

Given the nature of the population, there is no such thing as "sign only."

I know, its called sarcasm.

 

[jillio]

I know, its called sarcasm.

You might want to practice those skills.

 

[Hear Again]

You might want to practice those skills.

Burn!

 

[AlleyCat]

Burn ?? When did this thread become "That 70's Show" ? :roll: How lame.

 

[shel90]

at this thread...

As usual, everyone knows where I stand, so I dont need to add anything else.

 

[Hear Again]

Burn ?? When did this thread become "That 70's Show" ? :roll: How lame.

I don't watch that program (I saw it once and thought it was stupid), so I wouldn't know.

By the way, lame is when another person tries to dictate what should and should not be said in a given thread.

Back on topic...