Peer Relationships of Children With Cochlear Implants

[vallee]

In a perfect world, it would work and be effective but it doesnt work that way as I see too many kids come to our program from these programs u speak of with severe language and socio/emotional delays.

U are up for trying a child in different approaches/ programs to see which one fits that child. I am not as it just puts them at a greater risk. I believe in providing a bibi atmosphere for all young deaf children to ensure that none of them are put at greater risks for language/socio delays.

However, I am in the minority so I guess I will continue to see the influx of kids come to our programs with all problems because they didnt fully fit in as previously thought.

This is what I have to say, "Whatever to these kinds of research. I dont put a lot of faith in them anymore. " Too much damage has been done.

That's good that u have faith in oral deaf ed. I dont because of my personal and professional experiences.

I think until deaf education is fully addressed in home districts, more and more deaf children will be educated in oral deaf environments. Our school of the deaf is just too far away from our home district, I can see why parents do not want to send their children to a residental school. Also through deafread I have read about mistreatments in deaf schools. As a parent I can't see myself sending my children away.

How do you convince a parent to send their child to a deaf school when the home district has some accommodations?

 

[shel90]

I think until deaf education is fully addressed in home districts, more and more deaf children will be educated in oral deaf environments. Our school of the deaf is just too far away from our home district, I can see why parents do not want to send their children to a residental school. Also through deafread I have read about mistreatments in deaf schools. As a parent I can't see myself sending my children away.

How do you convince a parent to send their child to a deaf school when the home district has some accommodations?

What mistreatments?


Smaller classes...no overcrowding issues
Peers are just like them and communicate using ASL/spoken English (BiBi environment)
All staff are signers whether deaf or hearing giving all children full access to language anywhere and anytime
Direct communication with other kids and all staff...no need to rely on a 3rd person
Visual cues everywhere to meet the deaf children's visual needs as well as auditory cues for those who are more auditory learners.
and many more...

u say the home school district has some accodomations? The deaf schools are centered to meet the deaf children's needs educationally as opposed to the deaf c hildren having to constantly adapt to meet hearing needs 100% of the time. Yes, we have programs where our students can interact with hearing people and how to adapt but in the educational setting where learning takes place, no child shouldnt have to work to meet the teacher or other students' hearing needs. THe place of learning should be fully accessible to all deaf children at all times..it is their given right. Just like hearing kids have full access to communication and language at all times from anyone...why cant deaf children too?

I am done here cuz I see that we are going way off topic. I think I have answered your questions. U believe in oral deaf ed...I dont. I dont think anything will change that.

 

[vallee]

What mistreatments?


Smaller classes...no overcrowding issues
Peers are just like them and communicate using ASL/spoken English (BiBi environment)
All staff are signers whether deaf or hearing giving all children full access to language anywhere and anytime
Direct communication with other kids and all staff...no need to rely on a 3rd person
Visual cues everywhere to meet the deaf children's visual needs as well as auditory cues for those who are more auditory learners.
and many more...

u say the home school district has some accodomations? The deaf schools are centered to meet the deaf children's needs educationally as opposed to the deaf c hildren having to constantly adapt to meet hearing needs 100% of the time. Yes, we have programs where our students can interact with hearing people and how to adapt but in the educational setting where learning takes place, no child shouldnt have to work to meet the teacher or other students' hearing needs. THe place of learning should be fully accessible to all deaf children at all times..it is their given right. Just like hearing kids have full access to communication and language at all times from anyone...why cant deaf children too?

I am done here cuz I see that we are going way off topic. I think I have answered your questions. U believe in oral deaf ed...I dont. I dont think anything will change that.

I am not for only oral deaf education - far from it. I believe in appropriate education for all children.

 

[deafdyke]

vallee, you're deaf yes.......but you're postlingally deaf. Posties ARE deaf, but they tend to have a different perspective with ASL and Deaf culture. Some posties love ASL and Deaf culture......others thrive orally and in the mainstream.
And I'm not surprised that there are kids who do well mainstream and orally. That said, there have ALWAYS been kids who do well. That doesn't mean that EVERY kid will do well orally and in the mainstream!

 

[jillio]

I have been in contact with parents and children who are prelingually with CIs. Many do not feel the way you are discussing. There are many factors involve with a successful childhood either deaf or hearing. We can't make a generalization about mainstream education. Just because many deaf individuals growing up in mainstream environment had a difficult time(myself included) does not mean the situations for all deaf children are the same. Just as all parents and peers are not the same.

by the way, I view myself as deaf. I view myself as growing up deaf.

You may view yourself as growing up deaf, and that is certainly perogative, but your history would indicate that you were a post lingual, and that is an important variable. If those designations were of no importance, the categories would not be necessary.

Parents views of what their children are going through, and children's views are often quite different. Likewise, issues change with developmental concerns.

And no it doesn't mean all. However, preponderance of the research and anecdotal evidence indicates a majority.

 

[JennyB]

I just started working with a young woman who is 13, wonderfully outgoing, curiouse, and very smart. She also has downs syndrome and a moderately-severe hearing loss.

She has limited language development (the good old don't sign with her, it will prevent her from developing spoke language trick) and now we are trying to teach her sign. She is learning fast but the school will not provide her with deaf ed supports because she isn't 'deaf' and she doesn't know sign. Now she is slipping through the cracks in a school specifically for children with special needs.

It frustrates me beyond belief because schools will provide EA's that sign if it will help develop spoken language skills but not an EA that signs if it is to develope sign language skills. This girl needs communication! She is 13 and dying to communicate in anyway she can! I am working with her, trying to teach her sign. So is another worker but she is only getting about 6 hours a week of sign. The parents are going to try and fight for sign support at school. The school also promised them an SLP, never happened though.

I guess what I am getting at is no, segregated schools aren't always the best solution, or the perfect one. Mainstream isn't either. The key is the solution that works best for the person.

I am post-lingually deaf...kind of. I am pre-lingually HOH, my first language is SEE, spoken came later, and now my preferred method of communication is ASL and I am DEAF. I was mainstreamed, hated it even as an HOHer, even more as a deafie. Now I am going into University as the only deaf undergrad but I will be using interpreters so I am assuming for that reason alone it won't be as bad as mainstream highschool, at least I will understand what is going on!

 

[shel90]

I just started working with a young woman who is 13, wonderfully outgoing, curiouse, and very smart. She also has downs syndrome and a moderately-severe hearing loss.

She has limited language development (the good old don't sign with her, it will prevent her from developing spoke language trick) and now we are trying to teach her sign. She is learning fast but the school will not provide her with deaf ed supports because she isn't 'deaf' and she doesn't know sign. Now she is slipping through the cracks in a school specifically for children with special needs.

It frustrates me beyond belief because schools will provide EA's that sign if it will help develop spoken language skills but not an EA that signs if it is to develope sign language skills. This girl needs communication! She is 13 and dying to communicate in anyway she can! I am working with her, trying to teach her sign. So is another worker but she is only getting about 6 hours a week of sign. The parents are going to try and fight for sign support at school. The school also promised them an SLP, never happened though.

I guess what I am getting at is no, segregated schools aren't always the best solution, or the perfect one. Mainstream isn't either. The key is the solution that works best for the person.

I am post-lingually deaf...kind of. I am pre-lingually HOH, my first language is SEE, spoken came later, and now my preferred method of communication is ASL and I am DEAF. I was mainstreamed, hated it even as an HOHer, even more as a deafie. Now I am going into University as the only deaf undergrad but I will be using interpreters so I am assuming for that reason alone it won't be as bad as mainstream highschool, at least I will understand what is going on!

Exactly!

Iam all for deaf individuals' right to choose whatever communication mode they want to use as they are much older and more capable of taking over the decision making affecting their lives.

I believe in giving all deaf/hoh children exposure to both ASL and spoken language from the get go instead of putting each child thru different programs to find the one that best fit them. As a teacher, I cant do that do children. It would be unethical to me personally to put children at risks for language delays and other issues. I see what hearing kids have and they have 100% full access to spoken language at school because they can hear so deaf children should have the same rights...have 100% access to language and communication at all times in the school setting. That would be ASL and spoken English (if the child has more auditory needs but still needs to work more on listening skills).

Oral skills doesnt guarantee to a good education. I would rather have the children be placed in an educational setting where they are not constantly frustrated, at risk for missing out on info, and so forth.

 

[jillio]

What mistreatments?


Smaller classes...no overcrowding issues
Peers are just like them and communicate using ASL/spoken English (BiBi environment)
All staff are signers whether deaf or hearing giving all children full access to language anywhere and anytime
Direct communication with other kids and all staff...no need to rely on a 3rd person
Visual cues everywhere to meet the deaf children's visual needs as well as auditory cues for those who are more auditory learners.
and many more...

u say the home school district has some accodomations? The deaf schools are centered to meet the deaf children's needs educationally as opposed to the deaf c hildren having to constantly adapt to meet hearing needs 100% of the time. Yes, we have programs where our students can interact with hearing people and how to adapt but in the educational setting where learning takes place, no child shouldnt have to work to meet the teacher or other students' hearing needs. THe place of learning should be fully accessible to all deaf children at all times..it is their given right. Just like hearing kids have full access to communication and language at all times from anyone...why cant deaf children too?

I am done here cuz I see that we are going way off topic. I think I have answered your questions. U believe in oral deaf ed...I dont. I dont think anything will change that.

Exactly. "SOME" accommodations is not equal access to the curriculum. We keep hearing that these parents all want whats best for the child, and to provide all opportunities for the child, and yet they settle for "some" accommodations?

 

[shel90]

Exactly. "SOME" accommodations is not equal access to the curriculum. We keep hearing that these parents all want whats best for the child, and to provide all opportunities for the child, and yet they settle for "some" accommodations?

It is the stigma attached to it, that's why. Old news that goes waaayyyy back to the Milan Conference. :roll:

 

[rick48]

I have been in contact with parents and children who are prelingually with CIs. Many do not feel the way you are discussing. There are many factors involve with a successful childhood either deaf or hearing. We can't make a generalization about mainstream education. Just because many deaf individuals growing up in mainstream environment had a difficult time(myself included) does not mean the situations for all deaf children are the same. Just as all parents and peers are not the same.

by the way, I view myself as deaf. I view myself as growing up deaf.

Vallee,

Good points, as usual. There are indeed many factors that go into whether a child has a happy childhood or experiences isiolation. Funny, how those who do not have cis and/or are not the parents of ci children seek to speak on behalf of ci children and as always, paint a bleak and desolate picture. My daughter's mainstream experience was far from one of isolation that these people attempt to portray. And yes, she is prelingually deaf and has excellent oral skills to the extent that most people who meet her do not even know she is deaf.
Rick

 

[jillio]

Vallee,

Good points, as usual. There are indeed many factors that go into whether a child has a happy childhood or experiences isiolation. Funny, how those who do not have cis and/or are not the parents of ci children seek to speak on behalf of ci children and as always, paint a bleak and desolate picture. My daughter's mainstream experience was far from one of isolation that these people attempt to portray. And yes, she is prelingually deaf and has excellent oral skills to the extent that most people who meet her do not even know she is deaf.
Rick

Parental report is very unreliable. That is why it isn't used in valid studies.

 

[JennyB]

Vallee,

Good points, as usual. There are indeed many factors that go into whether a child has a happy childhood or experiences isiolation. Funny, how those who do not have cis and/or are not the parents of ci children seek to speak on behalf of ci children and as always, paint a bleak and desolate picture. My daughter's mainstream experience was far from one of isolation that these people attempt to portray. And yes, she is prelingually deaf and has excellent oral skills to the extent that most people who meet her do not even know she is deaf.
Rick

May I repeat myself, and the others here. You need to do what is best for your child and do what your child wants to do when they are old enough to decide. Others here who apperently "against" CI's and are "speaking for" CI children have said the same thing. There is no one shoe that fits every foot. Mainstream was great for your daughter. Awesome! Mainstream was not great for me. Awesome too, I will try something else. Everyone needs to be open to all appraoches and then pick the one that best suits the child.

I think one thing that I am against, and I think Shel would agree with this, is when the parents choose the approach that is best for them and as a result jeoprodize the child. Or when a parent chooses an approach without researching everything.

I think Shel and I are just a little bitter sometimes because we are the ones cleaning up the mess when mainstream doesn't work. I am not saying it ALWAYS doesn't work, just like I am saying segregation doesn't ALWAYS work.

 

[shel90]

May I repeat myself, and the others here. You need to do what is best for your child and do what your child wants to do when they are old enough to decide. Others here who apperently "against" CI's and are "speaking for" CI children have said the same thing. There is no one shoe that fits every foot. Mainstream was great for your daughter. Awesome! Mainstream was not great for me. Awesome too, I will try something else. Everyone needs to be open to all appraoches and then pick the one that best suits the child.

I think one thing that I am against, and I think Shel would agree with this, is when the parents choose the approach that is best for them and as a result jeoprodize the child. Or when a parent chooses an approach without researching everything.

I think Shel and I are just a little bitter sometimes because we are the ones cleaning up the mess when mainstream doesn't work. I am not saying it ALWAYS doesn't work, just like I am saying segregation doesn't ALWAYS work.

I agree with u on this one.

However, I am wary of the idea of being open to all approaches and then picking the one that works for the child cuz how do the parents really know? Many of my deaf friends, myself included, who have been mainstreamed have fooled the experts and our parents into thinking that we were just fine and dandy but when we werent really. That's why I advocate the BiBi approach for all so that way the children, themselves, have experienced both approaches plus a few others like CS and then decide for themselves when they are older on which approach they feel most comfortable with NOT the parents and NOT the experts.

If that means some older deaf children wanting to go to oral only programs when they are older, I am not against it but at least they already have established a strong language foundation and have strong literacy skills instead of the vice versa that I keep seeing year after year.

 

[JennyB]

I agree with u on this one.

However, I am wary of the idea of being open to all approaches and then picking the one that works for the child cuz how do the parents really know? Many of my deaf friends, myself included, who have been mainstreamed have fooled the experts and our parents into thinking that we were just fine and dandy but when we werent really. That's why I advocate the BiBi approach for all so that way the children, themselves, have experienced both approaches plus a few others like CS and then decide for themselves when they are older on which approach they feel most comfortable with NOT the parents and NOT the experts.

If that means some older deaf children wanting to go to oral only programs when they are older, I am not against it but at least they already have established a strong language foundation and have strong literacy skills instead of the vice versa that I keep seeing year after year.

I agree with you as well. I have also met some CI kids that don't even know what deaf is and are doing just fine with their hearing peers. Honestly I would never notice a difference. Deaf just isn't part of their lives or their identity at all. I also have seen kids like the one I mentioned earlier who are 13 IN a segregated environment and still aren't recieving the support required and deaf schools won't take her because she doesn't sign and she isn't 'deaf' though that is what she needs now.

I think that by saying BiBi for all you are also creating a one size fits all approach and you do need to be open mainstreaming or ASL only if that is what works best.

Even if I was mainstreamed in school I was brought up with Deaf friends and I did discover Deaf culture at an early age. Even if I wasn't getting it in school, and I was miserable without in school, I was getting it in other places.

I also feel that by saying don't listen to the professionals that discredits both you and I Shel. We are both professionals in this world and we do voice our opinions heavily. I think the mistake is to only listen to one professional, to only see one professional, and to take everything that professional says to be true. You need to hear out all sides of before making such desicions.

Ultamitly everyone would be exposed to everything. Every religion, every race, every disability, every language, every social class, every gender, every sexuality (you get the point) and be able to choose for themselves where they wanted to be, who they wanted to be with, and how they wanted to live their lives. That doesn't happen. Parents influence who their children will become and if a parent is hearing and wants their child to fit into that world only that is what they will do. Early implantation, intensive AVT, mainstreaming all the way and it is quite probable that child will never want anything else. If the parents are Deaf and choose to raise their child with ASL only so they fit into their world then that's fine too.

Shel, you sign with your son right? You are raising your child to fit into your world and he is hearing. It is natural and there is nothing wrong with doing that. I just don't think we can flame the parents for wanting to do the same thing. The key is early intervention to recognize whether or not that will be possible and if there is ANY doubt ensuring that there is language development, regardless of the language, so the child can at least have native proficiency in one language and then learn others later.

Language development is my main concern for kids. As long as their are getting that and have no delay/a mild delay I am happy. I don't care what language they are getting, just as long as I don't need to clean up the mess later. It is a lot easier to teach spoken language to child that has sign and sign to a child that has spoken language. It is not fun trying to teach a child who is 13 with a vocab of 50-100 words (spoken and signed) either of the languages because the brain just isn't capable of it.

 

[deafdyke]

I am post-lingually deaf...kind of. I am pre-lingually HOH

I wouldn't exactly call that postlingal. More like born hoh with progressive loss.
rick48, excuse me, but just because your daughter did well, it doesn't mean that a lot of kids do well. Yes, there are kids who do really well.....but generally that is because they tend to be kind of high achiever types. Like they tend to do well with minimal accomondations or they have parents who are practically disabilty rights lawyers.
That does not mean that ALL kids do well in the mainstream! That's all.....I mean I think that if you had experianced what a lot of other parents have, you would be as jaded as we are. Even my PARENTS (who were very pro mainstream) now say that they should have been more openminded about school /program placement.
It was simple luck that your daughter did so well orally and mainstreamed that she didn't even need the resource room! If circumstances had been different, I think you would be among our ranks!

 

[rick48]

May I repeat myself, and the others here. You need to do what is best for your child and do what your child wants to do when they are old enough to decide. Others here who apperently "against" CI's and are "speaking for" CI children have said the same thing. There is no one shoe that fits every foot. Mainstream was great for your daughter. Awesome! Mainstream was not great for me. Awesome too, I will try something else. Everyone needs to be open to all appraoches and then pick the one that best suits the child.

I think one thing that I am against, and I think Shel would agree with this, is when the parents choose the approach that is best for them and as a result jeoprodize the child. Or when a parent chooses an approach without researching everything.

I think Shel and I are just a little bitter sometimes because we are the ones cleaning up the mess when mainstream doesn't work. I am not saying it ALWAYS doesn't work, just like I am saying segregation doesn't ALWAYS work.

As I have always maintained that there is no one best or correct approach to raising any child, even a deaf child, not sure why you are directing your comments at me or chose to quote my post, especially since I do not advocate any single approach to educating a deaf child other than the one that is best for that child.

Also interesting that you are presumptous enough to think that one, ci children "need" someone to "speak for" them and two, that those who neither have a ci nor support it for children (despite the numerous successfully implanted children) nor have children with cis are qualified to do so. The ci parents have been doing just fine speaking for their children when they are young.

 

[jillio]

As I have always maintained that there is no one best or correct approach to raising any child, even a deaf child, not sure why you are directing your comments at me or chose to quote my post, especially since I do not advocate any single approach to educating a deaf child other than the one that is best for that child.

Also interesting that you are presumptous enough to think that one, ci children "need" someone to "speak for" them and two, that those who neither have a ci nor support it for children (despite the numerous successfully implanted children) nor have children with cis are qualified to do so. The ci parents have been doing just fine speaking for their children when they are young.

Then how do you account for the alarming rate of language delay?

 

[web730]

I absolutely agree with Shel and jillio's comments so far (plus few others too). Still a hot topic, huh. lol

Anyway, I think rick48 and vallee both don't realize how severe it caused the oralists, rather majority but not few ones who succeed or grew up fine, some serious difficulties growing up due to few obvious problems laid at them before at schools and socials (etc).

It (oralism) even didn't prevent their language delays, too as it has proven so far... not only with the deaf schools.

I went to deaf school yet I didn't experience any sexual abuse or whatever - the same with my close friends and some yet we have heard few sexual abuses happening over the years. Like some others sad that residential oralism schools experienced the same thing, but really, it is indifferent in the hearing world aka cub scouts, catholic schools, and etc. too.

You have to remember that we cannot blame deaf schools for failing to improve the language delays... why? Because in the beginning (the past) they taught oralism first while some started total communication...

but the ASL especially the early intervention part wasn't put in the action in the deaf-mainstream-oralism schools in the beginning back then so that indeed caused the language delays for so many deaf students in BOTH worlds even!

Then now we many recognize that it was the PROBLEM and want to change all that by reaching hearing parents and schools to start teach ASL at very early age the first thing then other methods may follow up, the better it does for those deaf-hoh students. It is undeniable the best way to do!

And yes, yes.. we must do something especially with those audist professionals and doctors themselves who kept screwing up in the past and still do! I think that every state residents need to do something real time to follow up the same thing that state of California just passed the new law requiring them to provide ALL methods for them to choose. But sure it's the beginning still... like stressing more and more reading, too!

 

[deafdyke]

The ci parents have been doing just fine speaking for their children when they are young.

rick, bear in mind that you only have seen the sucessful ones. I do know that AG Bell tends to be a magnet for families that can be catagorized as being overachiever type. I've seen the list of scholarship recipiants, and the gross majority of the recieptents attend REALLY top tier colleges.
I know a lot of maxstreamed kids (with all sorts of disabilites) who were assumed to be doing OK in the mainstream....they then discovered the deaf or blind or whatever disabilty community and the contrast was just.....WOW.
I know a lot of parents who are "Oh TrendilyNamedOffspring is doing SO well in the mainstream" When in fact they are just doing OK....like C- academic work lots of Resource Room time and having some "friends"

 

[vallee]

rick, bear in mind that you only have seen the sucessful ones. I do know that AG Bell tends to be a magnet for families that can be catagorized as being overachiever type. I've seen the list of scholarship recipiants, and the gross majority of the recieptents attend REALLY top tier colleges.
I know a lot of maxstreamed kids (with all sorts of disabilites) who were assumed to be doing OK in the mainstream....they then discovered the deaf or blind or whatever disabilty community and the contrast was just.....WOW.
I know a lot of parents who are "Oh TrendilyNamedOffspring is doing SO well in the mainstream" When in fact they are just doing OK....like C- academic work lots of Resource Room time and having some "friends"

C academic work is average grade level work. If a child is receiving special education services then they are not A-B average work because of modifications to the curriculum. If they are doing support work with services then they can achieve above average work grades. The purpose of "resource room" is the modifiy the curriculum so the child can be successful understanding the concepts they are being taught.

Like Rick, I don't feel that there is one approach to teaching deaf children. The point I am making is not all parents want their child taken away and put in a deaf school. Many parents want to raise thier child. Not just the weekends or once a month. Until solutions are developed in the home school district then more and more parents will opt to go the oral only route.

I see it daily with special education children(not deaf). We have students with disabilities that should be in a more restricted environment, but the parents want the child to be home. They opt to let us restrain and "deal" with the child, so the child is not taken to a residental environment.

About language delay, it is a severe problem. With No Child Left Behind it is all about the grade level skills not developing language and speech. Many teachers have put this to the back and focus on standards. The view of if they can just pass the test then they will be okay. No they are not okay. If children can not become independent academic readers then the educational system has failed children. If a child can not read the menu at McDonalds we have failed them. If a child can not express themselves and develop a healthy self-esteem then the educational system has failed them. We continue to fail until programs are developed and students become successful, not testing, not standards, not skills.