- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 45,080
- Reaction score
- 322
I agree with you 100% on that one. Special Education teachers with no training in teaching deaf ed have no business teaching deaf kids.
do you think downs sydromes should be in Deaf school deaf unit?
- Thread starter Grummer
- Start date
I agree with you 100% on that one. Special Education teachers with no training in teaching deaf ed have no business teaching deaf kids.
VacationGuy234
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2011
- Messages
- 4,030
- Reaction score
- 3
We can talk all day about the moral and right thing to do. But, at the end of the day, that is really just talk isn't it?
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Messages
- 69,284
- Reaction score
- 142
so you give up?
green427
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,882
- Reaction score
- 5
I am a parent of a mentally disabled child, and yes, you are right, there are parents out there that are in denial about their child's abilities. We know one woman who is pushing for her son's right to drive.....and he has no cognitive abilities whatsoever. It is extremely difficult for many parents to accept the fact that their child will not be able to do many things, and want to believe the opposite.
I don't know if everyone understands what I am trying to say here....nothing wrong with debating the placement of children with different disabilities....however, calling them derogatory names like "retard" and implying embarrassment being around them is downright rude & offensive. That is pretty much the only reason I replied to this post.
VamPyroX
bloody phreak from hell
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2003
- Messages
- 34,375
- Reaction score
- 19
If they have Down Syndrome AND are deaf, then I'm fine with that. However, other things should be taken into consideration... how his education progresses. If the kid is at a point where he/she cannot progress at the same rate as the other deaf students, then he/she needs to be placed elsewhere.
If they have Down Syndrome and are NOT deaf, then I don't see why they would need to be placed in a deaf program. They're not deaf.
I do know some schools that do place hearing special needs children in deaf classes. It's probably because of the schools' ignorance or inept understanding of the difference between being deaf and being mentally handicapped.
It's like the misconception that people have with being deaf.
"You can drive!? But... you're deaf! How?"
"I didn't know deaf people could read!"
"You're deaf? Cool! So, that means you can read braille?"
Come on... seriously. Just because a child has Down Syndrome doesn't mean he/she needs to be placed in a deaf class on the assumption that deaf students are dumb. :roll:
If they have Down Syndrome and are NOT deaf, then I don't see why they would need to be placed in a deaf program. They're not deaf.
I do know some schools that do place hearing special needs children in deaf classes. It's probably because of the schools' ignorance or inept understanding of the difference between being deaf and being mentally handicapped.
It's like the misconception that people have with being deaf.
"You can drive!? But... you're deaf! How?"
"I didn't know deaf people could read!"
"You're deaf? Cool! So, that means you can read braille?"
Come on... seriously. Just because a child has Down Syndrome doesn't mean he/she needs to be placed in a deaf class on the assumption that deaf students are dumb. :roll:
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 45,080
- Reaction score
- 322
Good points. Deaf children with non additional cognitive disabilities deserve to be taught at the same pace as their hearing counterparts.
Children with down Syndrome deserve to be in classrooms with staff who are trained to meet their needs and with the appropriate resources to ensure that they get the best out of their education.
Putting children with different cognitive abilities in one class with a teacher who may not be trained to meet their needs just diminishes the quality of their education. People need to be careful what you wish for. In a perfect world, everyone is one big happy community but in order for that to happen, everyone's needs need to be met appropriately.
AlleyCat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2005
- Messages
- 18,779
- Reaction score
- 2,276
"wittle" ?
That's about the same idea as you purposefully referring to special needs as "speshul needs".
About time you stop being disrespectful. Not everybody talks like you think they do. If you want to get your point across, back yourself up with facts (and not "oh, I have a friend who ... such and such ..." ) Please do not write patronizingly.
Last edited:
Agreed. I know its a sensative topic. And my philosophy with educating mentally disabled kids isn't based on any of that. It's more like "yes, they have a right to an education, but there's only so far they can go." Especially when they hit middle and high school. I think it's a lot better for them to have a class where they can learn functional academics and life skills. It could also be a refuge from the mainstream.....they'd have their own gang in other words. I also agree that it's wrong to call them names and act embarssed to be around them. They can't help the way they are......
AlleyCat, you're misunderstanding............I'm not making fun of kids with mental disabilties by using that phrasing. It's directed towards the type of parent who thinks that their kid is a "special snowflake" and will magically fit into the mainstream without access to special needs communities/resources etc.....which brings me to another point. I do not mock kids with special needs by writing that. It's the PARENTS who think that their kid doesn't need stuff for kids with disabilties (any kind of disabilty) b/c in their mind it's "speshal needs" and not "normal" Do you see? I see the value of disabilty specific stuff, and encourage parents to pursue stuff like adaptive sports, Special/Adaptive/Blind/Deaf Olympics, and fully accepting disabilty stuff....
Grummer
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2006
- Messages
- 14,707
- Reaction score
- 12
alley, you're barking up the wrong tree
I disagree that "...there's only so far they can go".
all this "they should" and "better for them" is the same as any other kind of -
those 'people' shouldn't be.....
which has been used for years with any group that people are afraid of/don't want to be associated with/think are less than.
all this "they should" and "better for them" is the same as any other kind of -
those 'people' shouldn't be.....
which has been used for years with any group that people are afraid of/don't want to be associated with/think are less than.
On the other hand, the VERY CONDTION of mental disabilty basicly means that they are mentally limited. There's no way around that fact. There's no way to adapt to that difference to live an adult life. They're literally mentally limited.
So limited that they will always need help to live, they will only ever be able to understand functional academics etc. Many of them will never be able to make adult decisions etc. As I said there are some indivdual kids who are relatively high functioning...but even those high functioning kids can and do struggle enourmously in the mainstream. I'm not going " oh go hide the mentally handicapped kid in the attic!" I'm saying that the very nature of their disabilty means that they will never be able to function fully in the mainstream. We're not talking about something equalivanet to the crippled children's schools of old. Did you know that in the OLD days, kids with say polio and other orthapedic disabilties were shipped off to state "Crippled Children's Schools" or orthapedicly handicapped classes, simply b/c they used a wheelchair or walker or crutches?" ...we're talking about a population where there is literally mental limitation. Yes, some of them will be able to do stuff that they never expected.....but due to their mental limitations, they will never be as high functioning as say a Deaf mother who went to res school and is a professor at Gally, or a Blind guy who sings for a living and has a family and owns a house or so on. They will live with their families or live in a group home and go to a sheltered workshop or day program or work at very simple labor.
Besides, the fact of the matter is that education has changed a heck of a lot......Mainstream education is now very college bound. There's not a lot for kids who will always be at say a third grade level or a first grade level.....See what I mean now?
And the thing is ....the base reason for not providing specialized classes seems to be at heart a Warm and Fuzzy "MY child doesn't "need" specialized stuff approach.
Why is it so wrong to admit "Yes, this population needs specialized help."
I support behavorial classes, I support other types of specialized classes...Why do people get all hot under the collar when it comes to mentally disabled kids having their own classes? Why? As long as they get a decent education?
Why is it so wrong to admit "Yes, this population needs specialized help."
I support behavorial classes, I support other types of specialized classes...Why do people get all hot under the collar when it comes to mentally disabled kids having their own classes? Why? As long as they get a decent education?
soooooooooooo very true
Grummer, you're right. This whole inclusion movement is just really dumb.
We need a contimum of placement...we need to make sure that inclusion is an OPTION, but is very very carefully done. I actually think that we need to make sure that low incidence kids should test into mainstream school. They should start out in a specialized school or program for the first few years so that they can get the training they need. Inclusion just seems to be a combo of Warm and Fuzzy and " just pass the kid along. we'll get the money from their placement, and won't have to spend money on an outplacement. Meanwhile we can get away with a minmal accomodnations approach."
I know SO MANY kids who were just passed along, and doggy paddled, when if they had been in a deaf or a blind or other specialzied program they could have done SO MUCH better!
We need a contimum of placement...we need to make sure that inclusion is an OPTION, but is very very carefully done. I actually think that we need to make sure that low incidence kids should test into mainstream school. They should start out in a specialized school or program for the first few years so that they can get the training they need. Inclusion just seems to be a combo of Warm and Fuzzy and " just pass the kid along. we'll get the money from their placement, and won't have to spend money on an outplacement. Meanwhile we can get away with a minmal accomodnations approach."
I know SO MANY kids who were just passed along, and doggy paddled, when if they had been in a deaf or a blind or other specialzied program they could have done SO MUCH better!
Grummer
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2006
- Messages
- 14,707
- Reaction score
- 12
i completely agree with you, its a real tragic that all this economic rationale has really gotten into people's heads, like THEY are the disabled (ie they cant think for themselves- stupid adminstrators, teachers, school funders)....it's scary , almost like a real -life packs of Zombies wearing ties and running school to rob more minds...
in uk we have something called statement,to do it properly they go to an assessement centre if they lucky, Takes 18months to do it properly,education speech health etc etc all the experts are supposed to put there findings on statement and the approprate school selected,but with goverment cuts it unlikely to happen like that anymore