I recently received an email from a parent of an eighteen month old child asking whether there were any research indicating the importance of focusing on the language spoken in the home at the preschool level, rather than utilizing a combination of different communication modalities. Having recently decided to go with Cued Speech, the parent expressed her concerns about the future of Canterbury Woods’ preschool program. Not having that information I passed her request on to people who I expected would be more help to her.
To provide some insight into this developing situation, another school system in
Montgomery County Schools merged the three different tracks into one, with all the deaf and hard of hearing children attending the same preschool. Now all the children are exposed to sign language, Cued Speech, and auditory-oral approaches in the same setting. I can’t see consistency as one of the program’s strong suits. Another issue is whether the teachers are fluent in all modalities. It’s a matter of specialization versus generalization.
One of my good friends, a native deaf cuer, has deaf twin daughters attending this preschool and has indicated his dissatisfaction with the program, stating that the teachers aren’t qualified enough in Cued Speech. Observers have sat in the classes and confirmed his concerns.
The twins came into the preschool at or above grade-level in regards to language, but the parents are frustrated with the preschool because they feel the twins are not learning anything new. They are contemplating pulling their children out and putting them in a mainstream program with a Cued Speech Transliterator. Frankly I wouldn’t blame them. After all I would want the best for my children too.
After preschool, the children are sent off to separate elementary schools relative to their track. I haven’t seen the statistics myself, but I’ve been told that the children are consistently going to kindergarten behind in language compared to their peers. Is this what the school system imagined would happen? I don’t think so. The idea may have looked good on paper, but in reality it just doesn’t seem practical.
Why is it such a big deal to merge different tracks into one preschool program? The preschool years are the formative years where each child develops the basic skills and foundations essential for the rest of their academic experience. In the Cued Speech community, educators place an emphasis on consistent exposure to the cued form of the home language (English in this case) in order for the child to have the most access to spoken language, just like hearing children.
In the case of Fairfax County Schools, each track has its own preschool program within an elementary school, thus providing an environment in which each deaf/hoh child is fully immersed in the modality of their parents’ choice, whether it’s ASL, Cued Speech, or Oral. The school system then incorporates all the deaf/hoh students into the same middle and high schools, providing services tailored to each student’s needs.
The question now is what is the best for these children? Should we expose them all to the various modalities at such an early age or focus on their primary modality? If I had deaf children in Fairfax County, I would prefer them to be immersed in a cued/spoken language environment as that’s what they would receive at home. I’m sure parents would say the same for their own children in regards to sign language or the oral method.
6 comments:
My daughter was in the Maryland preschool class of which you speak for one year (last year). Which meant for one year she learned absolutely nothing and her language delay worsened.
But I'm less convinced that it's because of the track merging than it is because of the quality of instruction/communication.
For example, my daughter was in a cued speech class all day except for specials like P.E. and story time. Thus CS was supposed to still be her primary modality while she was still exposed to other communication strategies. I liked this idea at first, and I still believe, given the right management, it could work and be fruitful. I still have issues, though, such as parent agency in choosing modality, as you noted.
Nonetheless, the teachers/paraeducators in my daughter's classroom did not cue consistently or to a level that I found satisfactory, and they privileged children who processed information via auditory channels and responded via speech only over my daughter, who did rely on visual cues, whether signed or cued. Quite ironic for a deaf classroom, no?
I think, in the end, whatever the communication situation, consistency and access is key. This didn't happen in my daughter's preschool, but if Fairfax can make sure that their students' IEP goals are met and they're learning in a language-rich environment, then I don't think the parents have AS MUCH cause to complain than in, say, a single-modality classroom where their children's goals are neglected.
Long-winded, sorry!
We were totally against this idea and raised some serious heck when we caught wind of it. If they want a total communication program, they should work on improving the one they have!
We just spent over a year learning how to cue, how to sign AND about the oral method so we could make a choice by the time our daughter turns 2.
While cueing is not right for every family, we believe all families should be encouraged from day one to pick a modality and not put off such an important decision for five or six years!
I'm a parent in MOCO with a profound deaf 16 month old with a CI. We just took a tour of the preschool about 2 months ago, and from our observation, while all 3 communication methods were in the same SCHOOL, these kids were not taught in the same classrooms together. There were separate classrooms for each. They did come together for special times, like snack,recess, etc. I actually looked at these inclusion times as a benefit, where my son could pick up Cueing from his Cueing peers and teachers. I don't necessarily see exposure to other D/HOH communication methods as a bad thing. Now, when the teachers aren't qualified, that's a whole other issue.
Due to other issues we have with just the flat out philosophy of the preschool, we are scheduled to attend the River School in the fall.
Thanks for a very informative post.
Thanks all for the clarification. I think we all agree that the main issue is how qualified the teachers are. Certainly a point to consider for all parents.
My deaf husband was a successful byproduct of MCPS, so I always told myself that if I ever had a deaf child (which could still be the case someday), that we would not live anywhere outside MC.
Now, this post has made me really think about what could potentially matter most: teacher qualification. My hearing daughter is extremely fortunate to be in a preschool where the teachers are obviously qualified and doing a superb job -- her language development has skyrocketed over the past year. Until reading this post, I never once thought that deaf children could be denied of that same opportunity, especially here in Montgomery County.
Thanks for sharing.
JT and others...
We need to be resigned to the notion that MCPS is pretty good when compared to other systems but on the overall MCPS is overrated.
Why overrated? If one takes a hard look (not the gloss bullshit look) one would likely to realize the quality of a MCPS education and experience (deaf and hearing) isn't commensurate (proportionate) to the cost of living index, tax rate and all the hot air talk on part of politicians and what not.
I'm a graduate of a MCPS high school but I have seen better elsewhere in certain spots in the U.S. especially in regards to overall accountability.
And Maryland School for the Deaf isn't one of them. Why? Too much eye-winking favoritism and ethical problems and misleading statistics related to that of student achievements.
And, I'm miffed that MCPS tends to keep failures in Cued Speech and Aural (Oral) under the rug when talking about successful students. I know many would point out to the finest of Cued Speech and Aural students and mislead others into thinking they're "typical" students. While average students (like myself) who use ASL--they call the best.
What a crock! I have seen enough Audism in ALL approaches to Deaf education.
Other than fringe breeding groups expect total extinction few decades from now.
Post a Comment