Oral school

Is it ok?

  • Yes

    Votes: 19 29.7%

  • No

    Votes: 31 48.4%

  • Maybe or sometimes

    Votes: 14 21.9%
  • Total voters
    64
Status
Not open for further replies.
kokonut said:
Loner? Hardly. Totally ingrained with too many myths.

The internet is one of the *many* tools in education. It's not the only answer. We all know that. Do you?
Click to expand...

Yes loner, weirdo, misfit etc. No myth. Fact. We all now that. Do you? :)
 
kokonut said:
Er, no. I didn't miss the point because I'm talking about TODAY and not 50 or 300 years ago. That was my point. The telephone industry in the beginning helped revolutionized the telecommunication industry which led to better phones and telecommunication services for deaf and hh people. It has helped spin off several phone related innovations and services such such as the UbiDuo, wireless video phone, TTY and so on. It has helped and it continues to help and provide valuable services for the public and career-minded. There are more professional deaf/hh people in the workplace ranging from doctors, engineers, scientists, business owners and so on. Ironically the telecommunication industry enabled deaf/hh people to become more independent using services and technology to their benefit. It added a few more notches in helping level the playing field. Laws and technology are the two things that'll help make it happen. It continues to move forward in that regard.

Besides, you can always wish that we're back in 1970s as adults instead of 20009 if you want. But I guarantee you that not a single Deaf person would want to do that. And we know why.

Let's not be ignorant about these things shall we?
Click to expand...

As an individual with interests in history, I can confirm you have something wrong here. I can suggest excellent history books from Gallaudet press.
 
kokonut said:
No. No assumption was made on my part. Please do not ASSUME for me. I said "deaf people" and not "ALL deaf people."
Click to expand...


"Deaf people" ...that's generalizing. Unless you meant SOME deaf people?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
With all these wonderful technology at our disposal, why bother teaching deaf children how to speak?
 
deafbajagal said:
It should be the parents' decision....but the problem is many experts do not let the parents know that...or push the parents in one direction...or there's limited resources such as educational choices in that particular area.

Parents have the right to get the FULL unbiased information on what their choices are...9 out of 10 (not a real stat...just a guess, but probably pretty accurate) of them do not get the information they need.
Click to expand...

I am not sure if proper information would help either. It's much emotions here in parents, when they try to make informal choices. I still see parents who have it all wrong, and still claim they know it all. Parental choices seems to often be an excuse to ditch empirical evidence, from what I have seen lately.
 
Look at Sweden.

Parents really don't have much choice in what they should do with their deaf child...it's pretty much chosen for them.

And deaf kids there are succeeding!! Many are graduating on (if not above) grade level.

You might have a point, Flip.
 
deafbajagal said:
Look at Sweden.

Parents really don't have much choice in what they should do with their deaf child...it's pretty much chosen for them.

And deaf kids there are succeeding!! Many are graduating on (if not above) grade level.

You might have a point, Flip.
Click to expand...

About 80 percent of deaf infants are implanted with CI in Sweden.
 
shel90 said:
Thanks Dreama...however when I stated that comment about those who don't see deafness as a disability, I was referring to language and communication not the job sector. Deafness is not a disability preventing from one acquiring a
Click to expand...

True, but I guess that would apply for any other minority group too.
 
jillio said:
Not a myth at all. Empirically supported evidence. Use some of that technology you are so fond of, and access some academic research on the topic.
Click to expand...

That is the second time in the last few days you have alleged that there is "empirical" evidence to support an unsubstantiated negative allegation concerning children with cochlear implants and/or who are oral.

Why not cite this "empirical" evidence, especially when you make a claim that these children suffer from "serious" psychological and social issues in greater numbers than hearing and/or deaf children who are neither implanted nor oral?

Hopefully, if you have such research it is not from a biased source, such as a Deaf college/university, Deaf program, Deaf organization or conducted by those who consider themselves Deaf.
 
True about Sweden..and what makes it so successful?

Parents MUST follow through 100%. If the child is implanted, that child must have the appropriate therapy.

I swear if I have a deaf child, my family will move there.
 
rick48 said:
That is the second time in the last few days you have alleged that there is "empirical" evidence to support an unsubstantiated negative allegation concerning children with cochlear implants and/or who are oral.

Why not cite this "empirical" evidence, especially when you make a claim that these children suffer from "serious" psychological and social issues in greater numbers than hearing and/or deaf children who are neither implanted nor oral?

Hopefully, if you have such research it is not from a biased source, such as a Deaf college/university, Deaf program, Deaf organization or conducted by those who consider themselves Deaf.
Click to expand...

I have not only cited it, I have posted the actual research more than once. And please don't insert words into my posts. Nor did I say they had "serious" psychological and social issues in greater numbers than children who are neither implanted nor oral. I said that technology does not significantly reduce the psycho-social issues experienced by deaf children in mainstream or oral programs. If you are going to argue with my posts, please stick to arguing with what I have actually said.
 
deafbajagal said:
True about Sweden..and what makes it so successful?

Parents MUST follow through 100%. If the child is implanted, that child must have the appropriate therapy.

I swear if I have a deaf child, my family will move there.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And not just follow up after implantation. Much earlier intervention as infants and home based interventions that include sign are mandated as well. Not to mention an excellent bi-bi educational philosophy that is standardized for all deaf children.
 
deafbajagal said:
True about Sweden..and what makes it so successful?

Parents MUST follow through 100%. If the child is implanted, that child must have the appropriate therapy.

I swear if I have a deaf child, my family will move there.
Click to expand...

GAWD, you must be dreaming just like the audists because if you want your deaf child implanted with a CI( it is just a tool to hear sounds just like hearing aids) so that he/she will go through oral method without sign language. It is very sad that Sweden want to implant babies with CI and that is forcing on the babies. The babies have no say on the matter of having surgery so early in their babyhood. It is better to wait until they are old enough to understand if they want to have CI or have hearing aids. I don't care whether the child will not be able to learn speech or to listen with the CI. It is much better to wait until they are old enough to understand what is going on. I am not against CI but not for the babies. They are so beautiful not to be cut up for CI. This surgery is not for emergency, just for audist wanting to get his/her deaf child "fix". Also surgery can be a risk to some babies. This is my point in all this talk about oral method only which I am very much against. Geez. :roll:
 
I never said I would allow my child to be implanted with a CI.

I want to move there because they have an excellent education system that has been proven to be successful.

The government supports parents...providing them with resources. For example, parents can take off from work to go to sign classes without getting in trouble with their jobs.

A large majority of the students are graduating on or above grade level. It's amazing.

The minute the baby is diagnosed with a hearing loss, the parent is given ample support.

As for CIs, as far as I know, the government does not force the parents to implant their children. However, children with CIs in Sweden are getting appropriate support that is needed so their CIs were not in vain.
 
deafbajagal said:
I never said I would allow my child to be implanted with a CI.

I want to move there because they have an excellent education system that has been proven to be successful.

The government supports parents...providing them with resources. For example, parents can take off from work to go to sign classes without getting in trouble with their jobs.

A large majority of the students are graduating on or above grade level. It's amazing.

The minute the baby is diagnosed with a hearing loss, the parent is given ample support.

As for CIs, as far as I know, the government does not force the parents to implant their children. However, children with CIs in Sweden are getting appropriate support that is needed so their CIs were not in vain.
Click to expand...

:gpost:

The government encourages family members to sign as well.

The use of signing itself is akin to talking so the success of language acquisition is higher.
 
Mrs Bucket said:
:gpost:

The government encourages family members to sign as well.

The use of signing itself is akin to talking so the success of language acquisition is higher.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Sign is a part of all of their early intervention. As well as involving deaf adults as mentors to parents of newly diagnosed children.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top