Re: Using Sign Language

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/27/2006 10:26:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,

daniellereader@... writes:

I will agree that the key to development in so many

areas is language. We have a need and desire to

communicate and if the language is there, no matter

which language, it will be much easier to learn a

second language.

I'm going to take a moment and post a presentation that I find incredibly

valuable in addressing the choices of communication:

_http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisite

d.pdf_

(http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisited.\

pdf) (this is the presentation with slides)

_http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.p

df_

(http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.pdf\

) ( Word for word of the presentation)

Putz

Illinois Families for Hands & Voices

_www.handsandvoices.org_ (http://www.handsandvoices.org/)

_www.ilhandsandvoices.org_ (http://www.ilhandsandvoices.org/)

Email: support@...

_A Deaf Mom Shares Her World_ (http://www.putzworld.blogspot.com/)

[Guest guest]

After reading a couple of posts from parents who say that they don't want to

teach their child sign language (SEE or ASL) because they want their child to be

" oral, " I would like to make some comments as a trained linguist and an

experienced parent, in hopes that it will make those choices easier.

When our son was diagnosed with severe/profound hearing loss at the age of

four months (he essentially completely *failed* his first behavioral hearing

test as well as his first ABR a month later), my husband and I immediately

agreed that we should start using sign language with him--not *instead* of

English, but to give him language and communication skills as early as possible

in life. He had already lost out on most of the " window " that would have allowed

him to acquire English naturally, and while we were certainly prepared to teach

him English, we felt he needed the opportunity to be able to communicate with us

even before we could get him hearing aids and teach him to talk. In fact, at

that time, the doctors were hesitant about whether or not his hearing would ever

be correctable with hearing aids.

We opted for ASL over SEE, because ASL *IS* a language in its own right. On

the chance that our son turned out Deaf, we wanted him to be able to talk to

others like him, on the same lines as teaching French to an American baby who is

surrounded by French-speaking people. I took a couple of courses in ASL and we

bought ASL dictionaries, and we used it with our son at the same time we spoke

to him in English.

He actually did start communicating with us using ASL when he was about nine

months old. He was nearly two years old before he could use English well enough

to communicate even basic needs with us orally, but the fact that he had ASL as

a way to communicate greatly reduced the frustration involved with teaching him

to speak English. His hearing now tests at moderate/mild loss, and with hearing

aids, he appears to hear normally, so he is now 100% English-speaking--he barely

remembers most of the ASL he used to use regularly, although he does still know

the signs for STOP and SIT DOWN, because we still use them regularly. :-)

In the long run, any child will learn to speak the language that they are

exposed to the most, regardless of the parents' wishes. Most children in the

world (outside of Europe and North America) grow up learning at least two

languages or more as part of their daily life, simply because they hear more

than one language in different situations on a regular basis. Teaching a very

young child sign language as a temporary means of communication will NOT hinder

that child's ability to learn English later, especially if most of the people

around the child speak English rather than sign language. A hearing child with

Deaf parents who use ASL will learn and use ASL much more easily than English,

just because that *IS* their native language, and because that is the language

their parents use to communicate with each other, not because ASL is an " easier "

language to use.

Kiminy

---------------------------------

Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates

starting at 1¢/min.

[Guest guest]

Kiminy - Thank you for your very intelligent post. I suffered a lot

of stress when we were deciding a path for my son because my " mommy

instincts " thought we should sign and speak until we know what

Donovan's language capabilities would be. This was taboo in the Oral

community that we know. I ended up doing a lot of research

including interviewing some highly educated and successful members

of the deaf community and was told everything you stated below and

more.

My advice to newly diagnosed parents: Please follow your heart on

this decision -- using every tool possible to communicate with your

child will not " hurt " them **Reference the kitchen scene from Mr

Holland's Opus for tears now***

Emylie,

San , Tx

Mother to Kaiden 6 going on 13 and Donovan, 9 mos moderate SNHL

>

> After reading a couple of posts from parents who say that they

don't want to teach their child sign language (SEE or ASL) because

they want their child to be " oral, " I would like to make some

comments as a trained linguist and an experienced parent, in hopes

that it will make those choices easier.

>

> When our son was diagnosed with severe/profound hearing loss at

the age of four months (he essentially completely *failed* his first

behavioral hearing test as well as his first ABR a month later), my

husband and I immediately agreed that we should start using sign

language with him--not *instead* of English, but to give him

language and communication skills as early as possible in life. He

had already lost out on most of the " window " that would have allowed

him to acquire English naturally, and while we were certainly

prepared to teach him English, we felt he needed the opportunity to

be able to communicate with us even before we could get him hearing

aids and teach him to talk. In fact, at that time, the doctors were

hesitant about whether or not his hearing would ever be correctable

with hearing aids.

>

> We opted for ASL over SEE, because ASL *IS* a language in its

own right. On the chance that our son turned out Deaf, we wanted him

to be able to talk to others like him, on the same lines as teaching

French to an American baby who is surrounded by French-speaking

people. I took a couple of courses in ASL and we bought ASL

dictionaries, and we used it with our son at the same time we spoke

to him in English.

>

> He actually did start communicating with us using ASL when he

was about nine months old. He was nearly two years old before he

could use English well enough to communicate even basic needs with

us orally, but the fact that he had ASL as a way to communicate

greatly reduced the frustration involved with teaching him to speak

English. His hearing now tests at moderate/mild loss, and with

hearing aids, he appears to hear normally, so he is now 100% English-

speaking--he barely remembers most of the ASL he used to use

regularly, although he does still know the signs for STOP and SIT

DOWN, because we still use them regularly. :-)

>

> In the long run, any child will learn to speak the language that

they are exposed to the most, regardless of the parents' wishes.

Most children in the world (outside of Europe and North America)

grow up learning at least two languages or more as part of their

daily life, simply because they hear more than one language in

different situations on a regular basis. Teaching a very young child

sign language as a temporary means of communication will NOT hinder

that child's ability to learn English later, especially if most of

the people around the child speak English rather than sign language.

A hearing child with Deaf parents who use ASL will learn and use ASL

much more easily than English, just because that *IS* their native

language, and because that is the language their parents use to

communicate with each other, not because ASL is an " easier " language

to use.

>

> Kiminy

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.

Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

>

>

[Guest guest]

I am glad to hear these things here. After a long road

with Auditory Neuropathy, a failed implant, and now a

child that is not responding with a working implant,

also having been at an oral school for a year.......we

are now using ASL. We started out using signs just as

an instinct, we did not know with the AN what he was

hearing so we did sign and talk, TC, and after the

implant at 2 years old we decided to go oral. Jaden

had a defective implant so he was deprived of language

for well over a year, even after the good implant was

put back in. He himself, through behavior and

development, showed us what he was needing at 3 1/2

years old, LANGUAGE!

I will agree that the key to development in so many

areas is language. We have a need and desire to

communicate and if the language is there, no matter

which language, it will be much easier to learn a

second language.

I have gone through the anger, I have gone through the

sadness, I have gone through the guilt.....I am now

happy to say that Jaden is aqcuiring language, his

expressive signing is very much ASL, and his social,

emotional, and behavioral development is also growing

incredibly by the day. He continues to wear his

implant and we are hoping that we can bridge the 2

languages, ASL and English, for him.

le

[Guest guest]

I have to say that I can see what you are talking about. My son is a CMV child

he's adopted and when we got him at 2 months old we were told he could be deaf,

and many other problems and they are right he is profound in L ear and moderate

to sever in the R ear. He wears a hearing aid in the R ear and in a

mainstreamed public school now. He was in a deaf ed program for pre school and

then last year when in K it was a K to 4th grade class and he was not ready and

they expected to much from him. We have done ASL signing with him since a baby

and he signs too. He also uses his voice and sometimes you can understand him

and sometimes not and he gets very upset when we dont and will tell us nevermind

and get mad. Last year after 9 weeks of school at the deaf ed program we moved

him to the public school and they did not get him a interpeter so he struggled

and showed behavior and would get up and walk away when they did story time and

they said he understands us but will not repeat to us everything. Well this

year he has the same teacher as I kept him in K as he was no where ready for 1st

grade he has a interpeter and he is sitting for story time and signing back to

interpeter and the teacher said I can not believe it and she said I did not know

he knew so many signs and I told her he knew that noone knew the signs at the

school last year so he did not use it much. And I tried to explain that the

kids know if they can communicate or not to who and how and he knew that you

wanted him to use his voice so he did but was not getting everything he needed

so he had the behavior.

Michele - mom to 6

Re: Re: Using Sign Language

I am glad to hear these things here. After a long road

with Auditory Neuropathy, a failed implant, and now a

child that is not responding with a working implant,

also having been at an oral school for a year.......we

are now using ASL. We started out using signs just as

an instinct, we did not know with the AN what he was

hearing so we did sign and talk, TC, and after the

implant at 2 years old we decided to go oral. Jaden

had a defective implant so he was deprived of language

for well over a year, even after the good implant was

put back in. He himself, through behavior and

development, showed us what he was needing at 3 1/2

years old, LANGUAGE!

I will agree that the key to development in so many

areas is language. We have a need and desire to

communicate and if the language is there, no matter

which language, it will be much easier to learn a

second language.

I have gone through the anger, I have gone through the

sadness, I have gone through the guilt.....I am now

happy to say that Jaden is aqcuiring language, his

expressive signing is very much ASL, and his social,

emotional, and behavioral development is also growing

incredibly by the day. He continues to wear his

implant and we are hoping that we can bridge the 2

languages, ASL and English, for him.

le

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 9/22/2006

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/27/2006 11:01:27 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,

emyliemarie@... writes:

My advice to newly diagnosed parents: Please follow your heart on

this decision -- using every tool possible to communicate with your

child will not " hurt " them **Reference the kitchen scene from Mr

Holland's Opus for tears now***

I agree and applaud you for following your instinct. I can't see how it can

hurt a child to give him/her a mode of communication and alleviate some of the

frustration and isolation of not being able to communicate. That is one of

my biggest concerns for Ian, I never want him to feel isolated.

And that kitchen scene from Mr Holland's Opus makes me tear-up every time

and has the same effect on my hubby. In a few moments it really does

capture/express so much of ours lives.

Best -- Jill

[Guest guest]

Kiminy,

I am glad you brought this up. Our daughter is nearly 22 months old and

we started using ASL signs wiht her from a very early age, along with

spoken English. She knows hundreds of signs now, but is using them less

often because her spoken language is taking off. It helped immensely

with frustration levels. She will use a combination of signs and spoken

words to get her idea across if I don't understand her. It has also

helped me to know what word she is trying to say so that I may model it

appropriately for her.

I have read several places claims that learning ASL hinders spoken

language and I just have not seen anything backing it up anywhere.

Maybe it is true in some cases, but I have learned not to believe

everything I read or am told.

> After reading a couple of posts from parents who say that they don't

> want to teach their child sign language (SEE or ASL) because they want

> their child to be " oral, " I would like to make some comments as a

> trained linguist and an experienced parent, in hopes that it will make

> those choices easier.

>

> When our son was diagnosed with severe/profound hearing loss at the

> age of four months (he essentially completely *failed* his first

> behavioral hearing test as well as his first ABR a month later), my

> husband and I immediately agreed that we should start using sign

> language with him--not *instead* of English, but to give him language

> and communication skills as early as possible in life. He had already

> lost out on most of the " window " that would have allowed him to

> acquire English naturally, and while we were certainly prepared to

> teach him English, we felt he needed the opportunity to be able to

> communicate with us even before we could get him hearing aids and

> teach him to talk. In fact, at that time, the doctors were hesitant

> about whether or not his hearing would ever be correctable with

> hearing aids.

>

> We opted for ASL over SEE, because ASL *IS* a language in its own

> right. On the chance that our son turned out Deaf, we wanted him to be

> able to talk to others like him, on the same lines as teaching French

> to an American baby who is surrounded by French-speaking people. I

> took a couple of courses in ASL and we bought ASL dictionaries, and we

> used it with our son at the same time we spoke to him in English.

>

> He actually did start communicating with us using ASL when he was

> about nine months old. He was nearly two years old before he could use

> English well enough to communicate even basic needs with us orally,

> but the fact that he had ASL as a way to communicate greatly reduced

> the frustration involved with teaching him to speak English. His

> hearing now tests at moderate/mild loss, and with hearing aids, he

> appears to hear normally, so he is now 100% English-speaking--he

> barely remembers most of the ASL he used to use regularly, although he

> does still know the signs for STOP and SIT DOWN, because we still use

> them regularly. :-)

>

> In the long run, any child will learn to speak the language that they

> are exposed to the most, regardless of the parents' wishes. Most

> children in the world (outside of Europe and North America) grow up

> learning at least two languages or more as part of their daily life,

> simply because they hear more than one language in different

> situations on a regular basis. Teaching a very young child sign

> language as a temporary means of communication will NOT hinder that

> child's ability to learn English later, especially if most of the

> people around the child speak English rather than sign language. A

> hearing child with Deaf parents who use ASL will learn and use ASL

> much more easily than English, just because that *IS* their native

> language, and because that is the language their parents use to

> communicate with each other, not because ASL is an " easier " language

> to use.

>

> Kiminy

>

[Guest guest]

Kiminy,

I am glad you brought this up. Our daughter is nearly 22 months old and

we started using ASL signs wiht her from a very early age, along with

spoken English. She knows hundreds of signs now, but is using them less

often because her spoken language is taking off. It helped immensely

with frustration levels. She will use a combination of signs and spoken

words to get her idea across if I don't understand her. It has also

helped me to know what word she is trying to say so that I may model it

appropriately for her.

I have read several places claims that learning ASL hinders spoken

language and I just have not seen anything backing it up anywhere.

Maybe it is true in some cases, but I have learned not to believe

everything I read or am told.

> After reading a couple of posts from parents who say that they don't

> want to teach their child sign language (SEE or ASL) because they want

> their child to be " oral, " I would like to make some comments as a

> trained linguist and an experienced parent, in hopes that it will make

> those choices easier.

>

> When our son was diagnosed with severe/profound hearing loss at the

> age of four months (he essentially completely *failed* his first

> behavioral hearing test as well as his first ABR a month later), my

> husband and I immediately agreed that we should start using sign

> language with him--not *instead* of English, but to give him language

> and communication skills as early as possible in life. He had already

> lost out on most of the " window " that would have allowed him to

> acquire English naturally, and while we were certainly prepared to

> teach him English, we felt he needed the opportunity to be able to

> communicate with us even before we could get him hearing aids and

> teach him to talk. In fact, at that time, the doctors were hesitant

> about whether or not his hearing would ever be correctable with

> hearing aids.

>

> We opted for ASL over SEE, because ASL *IS* a language in its own

> right. On the chance that our son turned out Deaf, we wanted him to be

> able to talk to others like him, on the same lines as teaching French

> to an American baby who is surrounded by French-speaking people. I

> took a couple of courses in ASL and we bought ASL dictionaries, and we

> used it with our son at the same time we spoke to him in English.

>

> He actually did start communicating with us using ASL when he was

> about nine months old. He was nearly two years old before he could use

> English well enough to communicate even basic needs with us orally,

> but the fact that he had ASL as a way to communicate greatly reduced

> the frustration involved with teaching him to speak English. His

> hearing now tests at moderate/mild loss, and with hearing aids, he

> appears to hear normally, so he is now 100% English-speaking--he

> barely remembers most of the ASL he used to use regularly, although he

> does still know the signs for STOP and SIT DOWN, because we still use

> them regularly. :-)

>

> In the long run, any child will learn to speak the language that they

> are exposed to the most, regardless of the parents' wishes. Most

> children in the world (outside of Europe and North America) grow up

> learning at least two languages or more as part of their daily life,

> simply because they hear more than one language in different

> situations on a regular basis. Teaching a very young child sign

> language as a temporary means of communication will NOT hinder that

> child's ability to learn English later, especially if most of the

> people around the child speak English rather than sign language. A

> hearing child with Deaf parents who use ASL will learn and use ASL

> much more easily than English, just because that *IS* their native

> language, and because that is the language their parents use to

> communicate with each other, not because ASL is an " easier " language

> to use.

>

> Kiminy

>

[Guest guest]

Kiminy,

I am glad you brought this up. Our daughter is nearly 22 months old and

we started using ASL signs wiht her from a very early age, along with

spoken English. She knows hundreds of signs now, but is using them less

often because her spoken language is taking off. It helped immensely

with frustration levels. She will use a combination of signs and spoken

words to get her idea across if I don't understand her. It has also

helped me to know what word she is trying to say so that I may model it

appropriately for her.

I have read several places claims that learning ASL hinders spoken

language and I just have not seen anything backing it up anywhere.

Maybe it is true in some cases, but I have learned not to believe

everything I read or am told.

> After reading a couple of posts from parents who say that they don't

> want to teach their child sign language (SEE or ASL) because they want

> their child to be " oral, " I would like to make some comments as a

> trained linguist and an experienced parent, in hopes that it will make

> those choices easier.

>

> When our son was diagnosed with severe/profound hearing loss at the

> age of four months (he essentially completely *failed* his first

> behavioral hearing test as well as his first ABR a month later), my

> husband and I immediately agreed that we should start using sign

> language with him--not *instead* of English, but to give him language

> and communication skills as early as possible in life. He had already

> lost out on most of the " window " that would have allowed him to

> acquire English naturally, and while we were certainly prepared to

> teach him English, we felt he needed the opportunity to be able to

> communicate with us even before we could get him hearing aids and

> teach him to talk. In fact, at that time, the doctors were hesitant

> about whether or not his hearing would ever be correctable with

> hearing aids.

>

> We opted for ASL over SEE, because ASL *IS* a language in its own

> right. On the chance that our son turned out Deaf, we wanted him to be

> able to talk to others like him, on the same lines as teaching French

> to an American baby who is surrounded by French-speaking people. I

> took a couple of courses in ASL and we bought ASL dictionaries, and we

> used it with our son at the same time we spoke to him in English.

>

> He actually did start communicating with us using ASL when he was

> about nine months old. He was nearly two years old before he could use

> English well enough to communicate even basic needs with us orally,

> but the fact that he had ASL as a way to communicate greatly reduced

> the frustration involved with teaching him to speak English. His

> hearing now tests at moderate/mild loss, and with hearing aids, he

> appears to hear normally, so he is now 100% English-speaking--he

> barely remembers most of the ASL he used to use regularly, although he

> does still know the signs for STOP and SIT DOWN, because we still use

> them regularly. :-)

>

> In the long run, any child will learn to speak the language that they

> are exposed to the most, regardless of the parents' wishes. Most

> children in the world (outside of Europe and North America) grow up

> learning at least two languages or more as part of their daily life,

> simply because they hear more than one language in different

> situations on a regular basis. Teaching a very young child sign

> language as a temporary means of communication will NOT hinder that

> child's ability to learn English later, especially if most of the

> people around the child speak English rather than sign language. A

> hearing child with Deaf parents who use ASL will learn and use ASL

> much more easily than English, just because that *IS* their native

> language, and because that is the language their parents use to

> communicate with each other, not because ASL is an " easier " language

> to use.

>

> Kiminy

>

[Guest guest]

and everyone else too,

I've heard Koch speak several times and she is truly a pioneer. I have an

enormous amount of respect for her. She rubs both the oral folks and the ASL

folks the wrong way sometimes. But she knows her stuff! And she is saying

something very new and very important and something that no one else is saying

yet. And I think she has some really important insights that her very diverse

background allows her to have.

I think what gets lost in the professional arguments about what she is saying is

three things 1. the fact that language, communication and cognition need to be

more important than communication mode. 2. You need to work with what you have

at the time - if you have an implant, work on auditory - give the child the

benefit of what the technology can do. Before the implant, work on auditory to

prepare for the implant but work on sign to provide language, communication and

cognition/understanding. If a two year old who has been deaf since birth has

language and understanding of the world, then when they get an implant, you

aren't starting from scratch. For example: a baby who understands and maybe

uses the sign for " more " or " big " or " mine " will be able to simply switch modes

to hearing the speech for those concepts. Compare this to starting from scratch

with a 2 year old with an implant who doesn't know any of these concepts, you

are having to build the auditory brain pathways plus the language plus the

understanding of the concept. If you have a child who already has language and

cognition you are only having to build the auditory stuff and therefore you can

make much better progress. 3. And also that you need to follow the lead of the

child. Some kids are going to be visual communicators and some will be oral

communicators and as parents we need to figure that out, either by trying one

and switching to the other or by trying both and seeing which one the child does

best with. And to try to optimize whatever technology you are using, whether

aids or implants. 4. The last and maybe first most important thing she

emphasizes is 12 months growth in 12 months time. And if you are starting from

behind, doing what it takes to get more than 12 months growth in 12 months

time. These are VERY HIGH expectations.

I think it is important to note that is NOT advocating sim-com or what is

called " total communication " by most public school systems. She seems to me to

be advocating more of an AV/ASL route which is different - VERY different. She

is truly advocating a new paradigm or a new way of thinking about the

oralist/signing conflict.

For example, she demonstrates what she calls the " auditory sandwich. " It is a

method she would use with a baby/young child who knew sign language and then got

an implant. It is something she does while using an auditory verbal (AV)

approach with a child who has an implant or aids. She would say the word, then

sign it or show a picture and sign it and then say the word again. So the first

and last things given to the child were auditory - so that would emphasize the

auditory. But it would draw on the child's already built language and cognitive

skills for instant understanding. Because the technology at this point in

history truly gives the child access to the auditory modality. And if you want

to build the brains auditory pathways you have to emphasize the auditory.

I think traditionally there have been three basic camps - oral/AV, ASL and

" total communication/simcom. " (ASL often gets lumped together with total

communication/simcom because they both use " sign language " but in reality they

are quite different) She is advocating a unique blending of ORAL/AV and ASL

that is NOT the same as " total communication/simcom. " For years ORAL and ASL

were seen as two opposite ends of a spectrum or as mutually exclusive - pick one

or the other. She is weaving AV and ASL together in a unique way. And she has

a very well constructed model and understanding of both modalities and truly has

something very NEW to say to ALL of us. And from the outcomes she is seeing,

it has a lot more to offer our kids!

So follow the links that gave and see/hear for yourself what Koch is

saying. She has a hugely important message.

Re: Re: Using Sign Language

>

>

>

>In a message dated 9/27/2006 10:26:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,

>daniellereader@... writes:

>

>I will agree that the key to development in so many

>areas is language. We have a need and desire to

>communicate and if the language is there, no matter

>which language, it will be much easier to learn a

>second language.

>

>

>

>I'm going to take a moment and post a presentation that I find incredibly

>valuable in addressing the choices of communication:

>_http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisite

>d.pdf_

>(http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisited\

..pdf) (this is the presentation with slides)

>_http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.p

>df_

>(http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.pd\

f) ( Word for word of the presentation)

>

> Putz

>Illinois Families for Hands & Voices

>_www.handsandvoices.org_ (http://www.handsandvoices.org/)

>_www.ilhandsandvoices.org_ (http://www.ilhandsandvoices.org/)

>Email: support@...

>_A Deaf Mom Shares Her World_ (http://www.putzworld.blogspot.com/)

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

and everyone else too,

I've heard Koch speak several times and she is truly a pioneer. I have an

enormous amount of respect for her. She rubs both the oral folks and the ASL

folks the wrong way sometimes. But she knows her stuff! And she is saying

something very new and very important and something that no one else is saying

yet. And I think she has some really important insights that her very diverse

background allows her to have.

I think what gets lost in the professional arguments about what she is saying is

three things 1. the fact that language, communication and cognition need to be

more important than communication mode. 2. You need to work with what you have

at the time - if you have an implant, work on auditory - give the child the

benefit of what the technology can do. Before the implant, work on auditory to

prepare for the implant but work on sign to provide language, communication and

cognition/understanding. If a two year old who has been deaf since birth has

language and understanding of the world, then when they get an implant, you

aren't starting from scratch. For example: a baby who understands and maybe

uses the sign for " more " or " big " or " mine " will be able to simply switch modes

to hearing the speech for those concepts. Compare this to starting from scratch

with a 2 year old with an implant who doesn't know any of these concepts, you

are having to build the auditory brain pathways plus the language plus the

understanding of the concept. If you have a child who already has language and

cognition you are only having to build the auditory stuff and therefore you can

make much better progress. 3. And also that you need to follow the lead of the

child. Some kids are going to be visual communicators and some will be oral

communicators and as parents we need to figure that out, either by trying one

and switching to the other or by trying both and seeing which one the child does

best with. And to try to optimize whatever technology you are using, whether

aids or implants. 4. The last and maybe first most important thing she

emphasizes is 12 months growth in 12 months time. And if you are starting from

behind, doing what it takes to get more than 12 months growth in 12 months

time. These are VERY HIGH expectations.

I think it is important to note that is NOT advocating sim-com or what is

called " total communication " by most public school systems. She seems to me to

be advocating more of an AV/ASL route which is different - VERY different. She

is truly advocating a new paradigm or a new way of thinking about the

oralist/signing conflict.

For example, she demonstrates what she calls the " auditory sandwich. " It is a

method she would use with a baby/young child who knew sign language and then got

an implant. It is something she does while using an auditory verbal (AV)

approach with a child who has an implant or aids. She would say the word, then

sign it or show a picture and sign it and then say the word again. So the first

and last things given to the child were auditory - so that would emphasize the

auditory. But it would draw on the child's already built language and cognitive

skills for instant understanding. Because the technology at this point in

history truly gives the child access to the auditory modality. And if you want

to build the brains auditory pathways you have to emphasize the auditory.

I think traditionally there have been three basic camps - oral/AV, ASL and

" total communication/simcom. " (ASL often gets lumped together with total

communication/simcom because they both use " sign language " but in reality they

are quite different) She is advocating a unique blending of ORAL/AV and ASL

that is NOT the same as " total communication/simcom. " For years ORAL and ASL

were seen as two opposite ends of a spectrum or as mutually exclusive - pick one

or the other. She is weaving AV and ASL together in a unique way. And she has

a very well constructed model and understanding of both modalities and truly has

something very NEW to say to ALL of us. And from the outcomes she is seeing,

it has a lot more to offer our kids!

So follow the links that gave and see/hear for yourself what Koch is

saying. She has a hugely important message.

Re: Re: Using Sign Language

>

>

>

>In a message dated 9/27/2006 10:26:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,

>daniellereader@... writes:

>

>I will agree that the key to development in so many

>areas is language. We have a need and desire to

>communicate and if the language is there, no matter

>which language, it will be much easier to learn a

>second language.

>

>

>

>I'm going to take a moment and post a presentation that I find incredibly

>valuable in addressing the choices of communication:

>_http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisite

>d.pdf_

>(http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisited\

..pdf) (this is the presentation with slides)

>_http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.p

>df_

>(http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.pd\

f) ( Word for word of the presentation)

>

> Putz

>Illinois Families for Hands & Voices

>_www.handsandvoices.org_ (http://www.handsandvoices.org/)

>_www.ilhandsandvoices.org_ (http://www.ilhandsandvoices.org/)

>Email: support@...

>_A Deaf Mom Shares Her World_ (http://www.putzworld.blogspot.com/)

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

and everyone else too,

I've heard Koch speak several times and she is truly a pioneer. I have an

enormous amount of respect for her. She rubs both the oral folks and the ASL

folks the wrong way sometimes. But she knows her stuff! And she is saying

something very new and very important and something that no one else is saying

yet. And I think she has some really important insights that her very diverse

background allows her to have.

I think what gets lost in the professional arguments about what she is saying is

three things 1. the fact that language, communication and cognition need to be

more important than communication mode. 2. You need to work with what you have

at the time - if you have an implant, work on auditory - give the child the

benefit of what the technology can do. Before the implant, work on auditory to

prepare for the implant but work on sign to provide language, communication and

cognition/understanding. If a two year old who has been deaf since birth has

language and understanding of the world, then when they get an implant, you

aren't starting from scratch. For example: a baby who understands and maybe

uses the sign for " more " or " big " or " mine " will be able to simply switch modes

to hearing the speech for those concepts. Compare this to starting from scratch

with a 2 year old with an implant who doesn't know any of these concepts, you

are having to build the auditory brain pathways plus the language plus the

understanding of the concept. If you have a child who already has language and

cognition you are only having to build the auditory stuff and therefore you can

make much better progress. 3. And also that you need to follow the lead of the

child. Some kids are going to be visual communicators and some will be oral

communicators and as parents we need to figure that out, either by trying one

and switching to the other or by trying both and seeing which one the child does

best with. And to try to optimize whatever technology you are using, whether

aids or implants. 4. The last and maybe first most important thing she

emphasizes is 12 months growth in 12 months time. And if you are starting from

behind, doing what it takes to get more than 12 months growth in 12 months

time. These are VERY HIGH expectations.

I think it is important to note that is NOT advocating sim-com or what is

called " total communication " by most public school systems. She seems to me to

be advocating more of an AV/ASL route which is different - VERY different. She

is truly advocating a new paradigm or a new way of thinking about the

oralist/signing conflict.

For example, she demonstrates what she calls the " auditory sandwich. " It is a

method she would use with a baby/young child who knew sign language and then got

an implant. It is something she does while using an auditory verbal (AV)

approach with a child who has an implant or aids. She would say the word, then

sign it or show a picture and sign it and then say the word again. So the first

and last things given to the child were auditory - so that would emphasize the

auditory. But it would draw on the child's already built language and cognitive

skills for instant understanding. Because the technology at this point in

history truly gives the child access to the auditory modality. And if you want

to build the brains auditory pathways you have to emphasize the auditory.

I think traditionally there have been three basic camps - oral/AV, ASL and

" total communication/simcom. " (ASL often gets lumped together with total

communication/simcom because they both use " sign language " but in reality they

are quite different) She is advocating a unique blending of ORAL/AV and ASL

that is NOT the same as " total communication/simcom. " For years ORAL and ASL

were seen as two opposite ends of a spectrum or as mutually exclusive - pick one

or the other. She is weaving AV and ASL together in a unique way. And she has

a very well constructed model and understanding of both modalities and truly has

something very NEW to say to ALL of us. And from the outcomes she is seeing,

it has a lot more to offer our kids!

So follow the links that gave and see/hear for yourself what Koch is

saying. She has a hugely important message.

Re: Re: Using Sign Language

>

>

>

>In a message dated 9/27/2006 10:26:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,

>daniellereader@... writes:

>

>I will agree that the key to development in so many

>areas is language. We have a need and desire to

>communicate and if the language is there, no matter

>which language, it will be much easier to learn a

>second language.

>

>

>

>I'm going to take a moment and post a presentation that I find incredibly

>valuable in addressing the choices of communication:

>_http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisite

>d.pdf_

>(http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisited\

..pdf) (this is the presentation with slides)

>_http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.p

>df_

>(http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.pd\

f) ( Word for word of the presentation)

>

> Putz

>Illinois Families for Hands & Voices

>_www.handsandvoices.org_ (http://www.handsandvoices.org/)

>_www.ilhandsandvoices.org_ (http://www.ilhandsandvoices.org/)

>Email: support@...

>_A Deaf Mom Shares Her World_ (http://www.putzworld.blogspot.com/)

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I don't mean to sound like a parrot today! But " me too " - this is

exactly what it's all about. It's so very hard as a parent of a newly

diagnosed child to even know that there are lots of options in

communicating with your child. Every child is different so no one way

of communicating is the best way for everyone. My older son is deaf and

is very, very auditory. If he doesn't understand you - and he's always

done this - he will put his ear towards your mouth. No lip reading,

etc. My younger son who also is deaf is a champion lipreader - much

more visual, etc. I think it's important to try one method, but realize

that another may work better for your child.

I have a degree in music and could *not* watch mr. Holland's opus for a

long, long time. Even now - 11 years after my older son was diagnosed -

it's difficult.

Barbara

JillcWood@... wrote:

>

> In a message dated 9/27/2006 11:01:27 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,

> emyliemarie@... writes:

>

> My advice to newly diagnosed parents: Please follow your heart on

> this decision -- using every tool possible to communicate with your

> child will not " hurt " them **Reference the kitchen scene from Mr

> Holland's Opus for tears now***

>

>

>

>

>

> I agree and applaud you for following your instinct. I can't see how it can

> hurt a child to give him/her a mode of communication and alleviate some of the

> frustration and isolation of not being able to communicate. That is one of

> my biggest concerns for Ian, I never want him to feel isolated.

>

> And that kitchen scene from Mr Holland's Opus makes me tear-up every time

> and has the same effect on my hubby. In a few moments it really does

> capture/express so much of ours lives.

>

> Best -- Jill

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

,

Thanks so much for the following links. I have read through the PowerPoint

presentation and found it very helpful , it really put my mind at ease. My

son Ethan (13 months) was implanted last week and we have been signing with

him since birth. He is a good little signer now, I remember you had helpful

words for me back when he made his first sign and now he is signing at least

10 words. I¹ve had trouble swallowing the strict AV model because my gut has

told me from day one to keep on signing, even though I obviously want to go

the AV route to help him learn to speak. Koch seems to have found a

perfect balance in that debate, which was exactly what I have been looking

for.

Thanks again!

(Mommy to Ethan, Freedom implant 9/19/06, activation date 10/10/06!)

I'm going to take a moment and post a presentation that I find incredibly

valuable in addressing the choices of communication:

_http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisi

te

d.pdf_

(http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisi

ted.pdf) (this is the presentation with slides)

_http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited

..p

df_

(http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited

..pdf) ( Word for word of the presentation)

Putz

Illinois Families for Hands & Voices

_www.handsandvoices.org_ (http://www.handsandvoices.org/)

_www.ilhandsandvoices.org_ (http://www.ilhandsandvoices.org/)

Email: support@...

[Guest guest]

,

Thanks so much for the following links. I have read through the PowerPoint

presentation and found it very helpful , it really put my mind at ease. My

son Ethan (13 months) was implanted last week and we have been signing with

him since birth. He is a good little signer now, I remember you had helpful

words for me back when he made his first sign and now he is signing at least

10 words. I¹ve had trouble swallowing the strict AV model because my gut has

told me from day one to keep on signing, even though I obviously want to go

the AV route to help him learn to speak. Koch seems to have found a

perfect balance in that debate, which was exactly what I have been looking

for.

Thanks again!

(Mommy to Ethan, Freedom implant 9/19/06, activation date 10/10/06!)

I'm going to take a moment and post a presentation that I find incredibly

valuable in addressing the choices of communication:

_http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisi

te

d.pdf_

(http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisi

ted.pdf) (this is the presentation with slides)

_http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited

..p

df_

(http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited

..pdf) ( Word for word of the presentation)

Putz

Illinois Families for Hands & Voices

_www.handsandvoices.org_ (http://www.handsandvoices.org/)

_www.ilhandsandvoices.org_ (http://www.ilhandsandvoices.org/)

Email: support@...

[Guest guest]

Thanks for sharing the powerpoint and it is a good one! My 1 year old

daughter has been learning to sign new words daily. She also uses

hearing aids at the regular day care center and the aids seem to

benefit her somewhat but don't give her access to spoken English. Her

caregivers said that she uses a lot of voices just like the rest of

her toddler group. Our goal is for her to learn ASL as much as

possible until around her 2nd birthday and she may receive CI to learn

spoken English. I know that a lot of parents would rather implant

their infants much earlier but we are already fluent in ASL and would

prefer to wait a little bit longer until our daughter turns 2 before

she receives the implant. It makes sense to encourage our deaf

children to be auditory and visual communicators at an early age and

then choose the communication mode that fits them best when they get

older.

Rita

>

> and everyone else too,

>

> I've heard Koch speak several times and she is truly a pioneer.

I have an enormous amount of respect for her. She rubs both the oral

folks and the ASL folks the wrong way sometimes. But she knows her

stuff! And she is saying something very new and very important and

something that no one else is saying yet. And I think she has some

really important insights that her very diverse background allows her

to have.

>

> I think what gets lost in the professional arguments about what she

is saying is three things 1. the fact that language, communication and

cognition need to be more important than communication mode. 2. You

need to work with what you have at the time - if you have an implant,

work on auditory - give the child the benefit of what the technology

can do. Before the implant, work on auditory to prepare for the

implant but work on sign to provide language, communication and

cognition/understanding. If a two year old who has been deaf since

birth has language and understanding of the world, then when they get

an implant, you aren't starting from scratch. For example: a baby who

understands and maybe uses the sign for " more " or " big " or " mine " will

be able to simply switch modes to hearing the speech for those

concepts. Compare this to starting from scratch with a 2 year old with

an implant who doesn't know any of these concepts, you are having to

build the auditory brain pathways plus the language plus the

understanding of the concept. If you have a child who already has

language and cognition you are only having to build the auditory stuff

and therefore you can make much better progress. 3. And also that

you need to follow the lead of the child. Some kids are going to be

visual communicators and some will be oral communicators and as

parents we need to figure that out, either by trying one and

switching to the other or by trying both and seeing which one the

child does best with. And to try to optimize whatever technology you

are using, whether aids or implants. 4. The last and maybe first

most important thing she emphasizes is 12 months growth in 12 months

time. And if you are starting from behind, doing what it takes to

get more than 12 months growth in 12 months time. These are VERY HIGH

expectations.

>

> I think it is important to note that is NOT advocating sim-com

or what is called " total communication " by most public school systems.

She seems to me to be advocating more of an AV/ASL route which is

different - VERY different. She is truly advocating a new paradigm or

a new way of thinking about the oralist/signing conflict.

>

> For example, she demonstrates what she calls the " auditory

sandwich. " It is a method she would use with a baby/young child who

knew sign language and then got an implant. It is something she does

while using an auditory verbal (AV) approach with a child who has an

implant or aids. She would say the word, then sign it or show a

picture and sign it and then say the word again. So the first and last

things given to the child were auditory - so that would emphasize the

auditory. But it would draw on the child's already built language and

cognitive skills for instant understanding. Because the technology

at this point in history truly gives the child access to the auditory

modality. And if you want to build the brains auditory pathways you

have to emphasize the auditory.

>

> I think traditionally there have been three basic camps - oral/AV,

ASL and " total communication/simcom. " (ASL often gets lumped together

with total communication/simcom because they both use " sign language "

but in reality they are quite different) She is advocating a unique

blending of ORAL/AV and ASL that is NOT the same as " total

communication/simcom. " For years ORAL and ASL were seen as two

opposite ends of a spectrum or as mutually exclusive - pick one or the

other. She is weaving AV and ASL together in a unique way. And she

has a very well constructed model and understanding of both modalities

and truly has something very NEW to say to ALL of us. And from the

outcomes she is seeing, it has a lot more to offer our kids!

>

> So follow the links that gave and see/hear for yourself what

Koch is saying. She has a hugely important message.

>

> Re: Re: Using Sign Language

> >

> >

> >

> >In a message dated 9/27/2006 10:26:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,

> >daniellereader@... writes:

> >

> >I will agree that the key to development in so many

> >areas is language. We have a need and desire to

> >communicate and if the language is there, no matter

> >which language, it will be much easier to learn a

> >second language.

> >

> >

> >

> >I'm going to take a moment and post a presentation that I find

incredibly

> >valuable in addressing the choices of communication:

>

>_http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisite

> >d.pdf_

>

>(http://www.infantva.org/documents/wkg-NewbornHearingChoicesInDeafnessRevisited\

..pdf)

(this is the presentation with slides)

>

>_http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.p

> >df_

>

>(http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/ehdi/documents/8-23-05ChoicesinDeafness-Revisited.pd\

f)

( Word for word of the presentation)

> >

> > Putz

> >Illinois Families for Hands & Voices

> >_www.handsandvoices.org_ (http://www.handsandvoices.org/)

> >_www.ilhandsandvoices.org_ (http://www.ilhandsandvoices.org/)

> >Email: support@...

> >_A Deaf Mom Shares Her World_ (http://www.putzworld.blogspot.com/)

> >

> >

> >