Parents want hearing school to get state funding

Miss-Delectable

New Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2004
Messages
17,165
Reaction score
5
Video: Parents want hearing school to get state funding - Main Line Suburban Life - Main Line Media News

Olivia Lampley of Wayne was born with a moderate to profound hearing loss, which was not discovered until she was 2 years old.

But today the 6-year-old dances to the beat at dance recitals, sings along with starlet Miley Cyrus and isn’t afraid to talk or listen to anyone she meets.

Olivia is heading to Beaumont Elementary School in Devon in September to learn alongside her hearing peers. She received an oral and auditory education at the Clarke School for Hearing and Speech in Bryn Mawr.

But children after the age of 3 who need financial support from the state cannot get it for the Clarke School because it is not on the state’s list of 40 or so Approved Private Schools (APS).

Parents at the school have launched a campaign to get the school APS status, stating that with only one state-supported oral and auditory school (the DePaul School for Hearing in Pittsburgh), parents in the eastern part of the state are not being supplied a viable choice, said Treacy Henry, regional development director for the Clarke School.

Henry, who raises money for children to attend the school, says that there is nothing wrong with American Sign Language, but that parents should have a choice. They say the state, by not adding the Clarke School to its funded Approved Private School list, is denying that choice.

According to Henry, officials from the Department of Education have stated that the current APS list will not be changed. Parents have sought and gained support from a number of state legislators, including State Sen. Daylin Leach (D-17).

In fact, a meeting between school representatives, parents and Department of Education representatives took place in Leach’s office. As Leach relays it, the group could not get answers as to why the school would not be considered for APS status.

Legislation has since been drafted naming Clarke an APS that will be attached to upcoming education bills.

But there is a new secretary of education and “we’re hoping the administration makes that not necessary,” Leach said of the legislation.

A Department of Education spokesperson said that the department is not currently taking any applications for APS status and that adding any schools to the list would dilute the budgeted line-item funds for the other schools.

There is no proposal to increase the allocated funding for the 2010-11 year, according to spokesperson Steve Weitzman, who added that the decision has nothing to do with the merits of the Clarke School.

But according to Henry, making Clarke an APS would save taxpayers money. She says that the required financial aid (for lifelong translators, for example) of a person who uses sign language is much higher than one who learns to speak.

This is not to say that those who use the oral and auditory method do not require some assistance; Olivia will get some supplemental speech and auditory sessions and her teachers need to undergo some training at Beaumont.

Olivia’s mother, Michelle Lampley, said her family moved to the area from South Carolina specifically for the Clarke School’s resources.

When she was born, Olivia could only hear a sound as loud as a jet engine. Missing her first two years of hearing required “remarkable” catching up, her mother said.

They moved here when Olivia was 3 years old and “she could hardly be understood. It was a dire situation.”

Now, “for her to be in a kindergarten class with her peers, I feel it’s a huge milestone.”

The field of deaf education has been revolutionized by standardized newborn screening, amplifier-technology advances (hearing aids and cochlear implants for example) and improved early-intervention services, Henry said.

The Clarke School in Bryn Mawr is one of five Clarke Schools, the first established in 1867 in Northampton, Mass.

The school provides services for children with moderate to profound hearing loss from birth through preschool using the auditory/oral model.

The building is designed for the acoustic needs of its students by using items like foam, soft wood and cork flooring to reduce background noise. The curriculum includes an intense language focus and speech therapy.

The tuition-based preschool program is $12,500 per year, but it costs about $40,000 per year to educate one child, Henry said.

If the school achieved APS status, she said she predicts it could receive $30,000 per child per year in state funding.

For children from birth to 3 years old, early-intervention services for the hard of hearing are funded through the Department of Public Welfare.

Once a child turns 3, it is determined whether he or she goes on to a “mainstream” facility or continues with preschool for special needs. At that point, the funding goes through the Pennsylvania Department of Education through the counties to individual school districts.

At that point, state funding is not applicable to all schools including Clarke.

So if a family needs taxpayer funding and wants a child to speak and hear, Pittsburgh is the only option, Henry said.

“Parents want an option on both sides of the state,” she said. “Our parents believe that parents should have the ability to choose the educational model for their deaf or hard-of-hearing child.”

Katy Friedland of Philadelphia is one of the Clarke School parents who are working on the campaign.

Her 3-year-old son, Julian, attends the school.

She said the choice to use spoken language is a “basic human right” and that the current model for funding is problematic.

“I’m not saying that [sign language] is not a great choice for parents; I’m saying parents should have a choice,” Friedland said. “Julian might learn sign language, but he also might learn Hebrew because that’s a culture we’re a part of.”

Michelle Lampley and her husband are both hearing. In fact, according to Henry, a vast majority of hard-of-hearing children are born to those with no history of deafness.

Lampley said they never considered teaching Olivia sign language.

“Maybe she’ll be the president of the United States. Maybe she’ll be a great opera singer. As a parent I want her to have every option available to her,” she said. “What would she say to me if I didn’t choose this option for her?”

Must say the Lampley parents are narrow-minded when they said they never considered sign language. Here they are pinning all their hope on this girl being hearing. Apparently she never thought about whether her daughter might ask her someday why ASL was not offered to her
 
Must say the Lampley parents are narrow-minded when they said they never considered sign language. Here they are pinning all their hope on this girl being hearing. Apparently she never thought about whether her daughter might ask her someday why ASL was not offered to her
It's especially odd since they said, "As a parent I want her to have every option available to her" and yet they deny her the option of sign language.
 
there are SOOOO many schools that need funding. Begger can not be chooser.

Just because one school offer ASL doesn't mean they should avoid it like a plague. They can make the school system work for them.
 
The building is designed for the acoustic needs of its students by using items like foam, soft wood and cork flooring to reduce background noise. The curriculum includes an intense language focus and speech therapy.
ummm, this is usually the reasons why we need a translator especially in college (she claim that the state will save money), if they get in the real world and they been living in this type of environment for speech access and not listening access... they probably will have a difficult time.
 
Wirelessly posted

If the state does not offer a full spectrum of placements for deaf children, they should have to pay for an appropriate private placement.
 
there are SOOOO many schools that need funding. Begger can not be chooser.
To me this seems to be another version of those parents who want vouchers so that their kids can attend private school tax free.
Coachlear and the hearing aid companies are making money HAND OVER FIST.
Why doesn't ASHA or AG Bell or whatever offer complete scholarships to the schools?
Faire joure....it's NOT about continum of placement at ALL. Many established Deaf School programs (as well as established public school formal dhh programs) offer quality speech therapy!! Speech therapy is pretty much de rigour at most Deaf Schools. Were you aware that the number of monolingal Sign only kids is VERY VERY small? There's already a TON of Dhh resources out there. This is just another case of a parent going " Oh we should be entitlted to this b/c boo hoo hoo it's SO expensive for us b/c we chose oral only." Oral only is expensive b/c private companies want to turn dhh kids into eternal consumers of (very expensive) hearing technology.
Why should taxpayers have to foot the bill for private companies to profit?
 
I don't understand why those parents think they are entitled to getting a private education for their 'special' child for free.

They could have worked their butts off to pay for that privilege.

Many parents down here who wants their kids educated in oral method have to send them to private schools, generally Catholic and pay the fees. No free rides from the Govt.
 
The thing is, they already have oral -only school plus other deaf schools (state run) who are perfectly capable of handling deaf with CI and it is all they can handle. All the parents need is ask the gov't to hire qualified teamwork for CI children and they can share the same building with deaf who use ASL. (because their building and all that is gov't owned.. it is cheaper than paying an expensive private school who is trying to make a profit) They don't need to be snob about deaf children who use ASL. The gov't have kids who have autisms, LD, mental disorder, etc. to worry about
 
Wirelessly posted

Actually DD it is about that. the state is required to provide a variety of placements so the deaf child can be placed in the least restrictive enviroment.

also, ag bell DOES offer scholarships to kids of all ages.
 
Wirelessly posted

If the state does not offer a full spectrum of placements for deaf children, they should have to pay for an appropriate private placement.

A child can receive an orally based education in a mainstream environment. It is not necessary for a child to attend a private oral school in order to be in an oral environment educationally.
 
A child can receive an orally based education in a mainstream environment. It is not necessary for a child to attend a private oral school in order to be in an oral environment educationally.

A mainstream enviroment is more restrictive for an oral deaf student because they do not have a teacher who understands the needs of deaf students and they are not around deaf peers. This sort of placement can easily be the least restrictive enviroment, and if the IEP determines that, the school should pay. There needs to be a contium of placements available, not just one deaf school or the mainstream.
 
A mainstream enviroment is more restrictive for an oral deaf student because they do not have a teacher who understands the needs of deaf students and they are not around deaf peers. This sort of placement can easily be the least restrictive enviroment, and if the IEP determines that, the school should pay. There needs to be a contium of placements available, not just one deaf school or the mainstream.

You are going to have one heck of a time convincing the school system of that. ADA allows for reasonable accommodations. If a parent wants their child to be in an oral environment, and for all purposes, to function as their hearing peers do, then mainstream it will be. Want more, then be prepared to pay the tuition. A deaf child who functions in an all oral environment is not believed to need services of a specialized environment. Mainstream schools already make what is considered to be reasonable accommodations for the orally based child.

An oral environment, period, is more restrictive for the deaf child. If you choose an oral path, then you have already placed that child in the position of being in a more restrictive environment. Can't have it both ways.
 
You are going to have one heck of a time convincing the school system of that. ADA allows for reasonable accommodations. If a parent wants their child to be in an oral environment, and for all purposes, to function as their hearing peers do, then mainstream it will be. Want more, then be prepared to pay the tuition. A deaf child who functions in an all oral environment is not believed to need services of a specialized environment. Mainstream schools already make what is considered to be reasonable accommodations for the orally based child.

It depends on the area one lives. In my area it is easy to convice the IEP team that a student needs an oral deaf ed placement, and we have a state funded school for the deaf with an oral program. In the article it says that in the eastern part of the state the oral deaf school is approved and paid for. In St. Louis attending one of the oral schools is assumed for a oral kid and paid for by the school districts.
 
It depends on the area one lives. In my area it is easy to convice the IEP team that a student needs an oral deaf ed placement, and we have a state funded school for the deaf with an oral program. In the article it says that in the eastern part of the state the oral deaf school is approved and paid for. In St. Louis attending one of the oral schools is assumed for a oral kid and paid for by the school districts.

That is because you have a state funded oral school. State funded contained programs work the same way. There is no doubt, a state funded contained program available for this child. The parents are simply choosing to use a private school. They could no doubt have their child attend a contained program and the school system will pay the out of district tuition. Or, they can send their child to the oral school that is available in another part of the state and the school system will pay for the tuition. Parents also have the option of moving to an area where a state funded program is available.They have chosen a private school. They are now facing the consequences of their decision. The state is not responsible for that.
 
That is because you have a state funded oral school. State funded contained programs work the same way. There is no doubt, a state funded contained program available for this child. The parents are simply choosing to use a private school. They could no doubt have their child attend a contained program and the school system will pay the out of district tuition. Or, they can send their child to the oral school that is available in another part of the state and the school system will pay for the tuition. Parents also have the option of moving to an area where a state funded program is available.They have chosen a private school. They are now facing the consequences of their decision. The state is not responsible for that.

Are you saying that if there is NOT a self contained classroom available, in the child's language, or that if the school is unwilling to fund sending the child to the other approved school, they would be wrong? If those options are not available to a family, what should the school offer?
 
That is because you have a state funded oral school. State funded contained programs work the same way. There is no doubt, a state funded contained program available for this child. The parents are simply choosing to use a private school. They could no doubt have their child attend a contained program and the school system will pay the out of district tuition. Or, they can send their child to the oral school that is available in another part of the state and the school system will pay for the tuition. Parents also have the option of moving to an area where a state funded program is available.They have chosen a private school. They are now facing the consequences of their decision. The state is not responsible for that.

I also think it is unfair that in one area the public pays for a private placement, and in another it doesn't. In St. Louis you get your pick of private schools, funded by your district, but clearly not in PA, even though the resources are there.
 
The school will lose it quality if it become state approved. More parents will say "Hey, I want to send my kids there too!" Nope.. can't because the ratio of teachers that the school can handle (and the building as well). So what happen to them? What if the state approved private school is FULL and they rejected YOUR CHILD? What you plan to do then? My son's school (private) is always full and won't take new students.

You can't keep building new "oral schools" that would be bad for the environment anyhow. They are stuck. So the public school or state run deaf school need to handle these kids when private school is too full.
 
The school will lose it quality if it become state approved. More parents will say "Hey, I want to send my kids there too!" Nope.. can't because the ratio of teachers that the school can handle (and the building as well). So what happen to them? What if the state approved private school is FULL and they rejected YOUR CHILD? What you plan to do then? My son's school is always full and won't take new students.

You can't keep building new "oral schools" that would be bad for the environment anyhow. They are stuck. So the public school or state run deaf school need to handle these kids.

But that would require that the state school change it's philosophy, or you would be placing a child in a restrictive eniroment. If there is a need for more schools because there are more students, they should build them.
 
But that would require that the state school change it's philosophy, or you would be placing a child in a restrictive environment. If there is a need for more schools because there are more students, they should build them.

they don't need to build more building if they have too many empty deaf schools.
 
I also think it is unfair that in one area the public pays for a private placement, and in another it doesn't. In St. Louis you get your pick of private schools, funded by your district, but clearly not in PA, even though the resources are there.

If it is a state funded school, it is not private placement. And parents have the option of relocating to an area that has more services on a state funded level. They also have the option of paying private school tuition if they don't want their child in the state funded options. Options are always available. The question is, are the parents willing to do what they need to do to take advantage of those options?
 
Back
Top