Teacher of the Deaf programs

Out of the 70 TOD programs, how many emphasize listening and spoken language?

  • 0-15

    Votes: 2 40.0%

  • 16-30

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 31-45

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 46-60

    Votes: 3 60.0%

  • 61+

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    5
shel90 said:
Do u think teachers need formal training to use spoken English with deaf kids? If so, that doesn't make sense because you simply teach using your voice just like hearing teachers of hearing kids do.

Teaching using two languages (blingual) requires more skills than teaching using one language (monolingual). That should be a priority in these programs.

If teachers are required to teach speech and listening skills to deaf children then they they become more like speech therapists than teachers.
Click to expand...

agreed. it does not make sense.

It's hard to combine to learn how to speak and learn at the same time.
 
shel90 said:
Do u think teachers need formal training to use spoken English with deaf kids? If so, that doesn't make sense because you simply teach using your voice just like hearing teachers of hearing kids do.

Teaching using two languages (blingual) requires more skills than teaching using one language (monolingual). That should be a priority in these programs.

If teachers are required to teach speech and listening skills to deaf children then they they become more like speech therapists than teachers.
Click to expand...

Of course I think they need formal training! They are teaching deaf kids, not hearing kids!

The teachers need to understand the acostics of every sound in the English language and how each of their students hear that sound with their amplification. They need to know if they can hear and discriminate all those sounds, and if they can't, how are they going to get them access to that sound. They need to understand the hierarchy of auditory skill development and exactly where each child is on the list. They need to continuously encourage more receptive language on the current level, but also help the child to move on to the next level.

That is just 2 of the literally THOSANDS of things the teachers must know, that having nothing to do with speech.

JTC gave us 15 days of lectures and information and we are just parents, not educators!
 
faire_jour said:
Of course I think they need formal training! They are teaching deaf kids, not hearing kids!

The teachers need to understand the acostics of every sound in the English language and how each of their students hear that sound with their amplification. They need to know if they can hear and discriminate all those sounds, and if they can't, how are they going to get them access to that sound. They need to understand the hierarchy of auditory skill development and exactly where each child is on the list. They need to continuously encourage more receptive language on the current level, but also help the child to move on to the next level.

That is just 2 of the literally THOSANDS of things the teachers must know, that having nothing to do with speech.

JTC gave us 15 days of lectures and information and we are just parents, not educators!
Click to expand...

Those all sound like things audiologist, speech therapist, and parent does.

Otherwise you are going to end up with a really unbalanced person who only knows speech.
 
Bottesini said:
Those all sound like things audiologist, speech therapist, and parent does.

Otherwise you are going to end up with a really unbalanced person who only knows speech.
Click to expand...

They do need to know some audiology, some speech and lots about language. They also have to combine all that knowledge with actual teaching and curriculum.That's why they need to be highly trained an knowlegable!
 
audiologist, speech therapist, parents....It's call teamwork. Let teachers do their job and teach in visual based teaching if that's what they prefer to do. The school can hire an AVT teacher they want to.
 
faire_jour said:
They do need to know some audiology, some speech and lots about language. They also have to combine all that knowledge with actual teaching and curriculum.That's why they need to be highly trained an knowlegable!
Click to expand...

this probably make some deaf people who sign feel even more at disavantage they start requiring this. You say we always need a deaf teacher, but I see it now... "Sorry, you can only be an assistant and not a real teacher" MaIybe they can add an optional elective (sp? I mean course) in college just for that for that but it shouldn't be a requirement.
 
A said:
this probably make some deaf people who sign feel even more at disavantage they start requiring this. You say we always need a deaf teacher, but I see it now... "Sorry, you can only be an assistant and not a real teacher" MaIybe they can add an optional elective (sp? I mean course) in college just for that for that but it shouldn't be a requirement.
Click to expand...

But if 90% of kids are using and learning through spoken language, how does training teachers to teach visually help them?
 
faire_jour said:
But if 90% of kids are using and learning through spoken language, how does training teachers to teach visually help them?
Click to expand...

90% deaf?

Wow, that's a good number consider there are way too many "visual -based"
teachers.

There is a big different between being able to speak well, use speechreading (like myself) and being able to understand the teacher using auditory-based teaching. Even my public school couldn't use this method on me. Which is why they always wrote on boards and used projector and put me on front row.

What exactly do you want? You want teachers to use her voice on all subjects all day? and what grade level are you talking about anyway. I am not sure where you are coming from, really.
 
A said:
90% deaf?

Wow, that's a good number consider there are way too many "visual -based"
teachers.

There is a big different between being able to speak well, use speechreading (like myself) and being able to understand the teacher using auditory-based teaching. Even my public school couldn't use this method on me. Which is why they always wrote on boards and used projector and put me on front row.

What exactly do you want? You want teachers to use her voice on all subjects all day? and what grade level are you talking about anyway. I am not sure where you are coming from, really.
Click to expand...

Yes, 90% of deaf and hard of hearing students use listening and spoken language for school and communication. My point is that less than 1/5th of their teachers (they are teachers of the deaf, right?) having training, schooling and expertise in that way of teaching and learning.
 
in classroom, it always seem like this: It would like "Today [inaudible]lass, we are going to learn abou[inaudible] [inaudible]"

I can see why teacher of the deaf use visual based communication.
 
I totally agree with you on every aspect Botts and A have stated.

Deaf children are deaf and they need to be educated properly not worrying about their ability to hear and discriminate sounds. That is a sppech therapy lesson itself. Why do you want to make things more complicated by adding those requirements in the classroom?

If it gets to that point, I am leaving the teaching field. I had more than enough of speech therapy and I am not interested in any more.

I just want to teach and be a rold model for many deaf children, not force them to use their weakest sense and increase the level of frustration in the classroom setting. Not my bag.
 
A said:
in classroom, it always seem like this: It would like "Today [inaudible]lass, we are going to learn abou[inaudible] [inaudible]"

I can see why teacher of the deaf use visual based communication.
Click to expand...

I understand why we advocate for ASL, but the fact is that 90% of deaf kids aen't using ASL. Shouldn't the teachers be trained to teach them?
 
The answer is no. Unless they want to another college degree.

Those inaudible sounds I hear.. That's where I took guesswork and fill in the gap...

I do not know which school these kids are going to, but if you say 90% are orally deaf and do not use sign language, it seem they are well taken care of somewhere. Most of the time, parents put their children in AVT so they can go to mainstreamed school to interact with hearing kids, not deaf schools. Beside my mom would still never go for deaf school that use oral method, anyway. She wanted me to be with my brothers and sisters and it would mean public school. That's was always her goal.
 
A said:
The answer is no.

Those inaudible sounds I hear.. That's where I took guesswork and fill in the gap...

I do not know which school these kids are going to, but if you say 90% are orally deaf and do not use sign language, it seem they are well taken care of somewhere. Most of the time, parents put their children in AVT (with CI and some HOH) so they can go to mainstreamed school to interact with hearing kids, not deaf schools. Beside my mom would still never go for deaf school that use oral method, anyway. She wanted me to be with my brothers and sisters and it would mean public school. That's was always her goal.
Click to expand...

I think it is every deaf child's ight to interact with other deaf peers and have teachers who understand them and their needs. You don't? You think that people should pretend they are hearing and treat them that way? I think they should be educated as deaf children, regardless of the language that they use.
 
A said:
The answer is no. Unless they want to another college degree.

Those inaudible sounds I hear.. That's where I took guesswork and fill in the gap...

I do not know which school these kids are going to, but if you say 90% are orally deaf and do not use sign language, it seem they are well taken care of somewhere. Most of the time, parents put their children in AVT so they can go to mainstreamed school to interact with hearing kids, not deaf schools. Beside my mom would still never go for deaf school that use oral method, anyway. She wanted me to be with my brothers and sisters and it would mean public school. That's was always her goal.
Click to expand...

I think faire_jour has a degree in special pedagogy. It can then explain a lot of her claims and way of thinking here.
 
Back
Top