Last night at the Northern Virginia Association of the Deaf Christmas party I met a couple with a deaf child. Their child used sign language. We got to chatting, and I learned that the child attended the River School in northwest Washington, DC. The River School is a private school for deaf and hard of hearing children. I asked the parents, "but isn't the River School an oral school?" They replied that yes, River School was primarily an oral school, but because of apparent stipulations by donors to the school, they have had to become somewhat flexible, allowing sign language when needed or desired.
When I got home I checked out the River School website. The website makes no mention of permitting use of sign language as desired or needed, and emphasizes oral education. I have never visited the River School, so I do not know what the learning environment is like. Are students there learning both orally and with sign language? All I know is that I met a signing deaf child who attends a school that purports to be oral.
Incidentially, the parents said their signing child was thriving at the River School, so the school must be doing something right.
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Perhaps an "Oral program" can include sign, while an "auditory-verbal program" does not?
It's right here in the FAQ of The River School:
Does the River School prohibit the use of sign language?
Spoken English is the mode of communication and instruction at the River School. We believe that early identification and intervention, coupled with judicious use of technology, provide children with hearing loss an unprecedented opportunity to acquire spoken language. We also believe that the development of spoken language provides the best foundation for literacy, unrestricted communication and educational opportunities. We recognize that children with hearing loss may require more time and attention to develop such skills than their hearing peers. Therefore we use a variety of tools; including sign supported English in select situations, for our students during the critical early period of development. As a program that strives to support the "whole child" we believe that access to unambiguous communication facilitates the development of social and cognitive skills. We view the use of sign language as a bridge to spoken language, and a good strategy for some of our students with hearing loss who are emergent oral language users. If your family has opted for a primarily Aural/Oral approach and your child is developing language without sign, oral language would be used exclusively.
You brought up an interesting point which reminds us all - money talks. Programs and organizations along with other entities that depend on donations will often listen to what donors want especially if there are enough like-minded donors. Perhaps that's a strategy we should look at?
Not wanting to nitpick here but I want to caution against making generalizing assumptions based on one situation such as the River School - one signing student doing well doesn't mean there are other students like him or her. However, it does bear to take a closer examination at what the school is actually doing and how the rest of the student body is doing.
Poor,
Thanks for posting that information. It is pretty well hidden on the site though...I had to hunt for it after reading your comment. I finally found it under "The River Approach...Children & Hearing Loss."
And when you go to the home page, the first thing you see is "The mission of the River School is to provide successful educational experiences for children and their families by uniting the best practices of early childhood education and oral deaf education..." with no mention of allowing the use of sign language.
As a graduate student in Gallaudet's Deaf Education Program, I have had the pleasure to visit many of the deaf programs through out the DC/MD/VA area. One of the schools I had the pleasure of visiting was River School.
As an oral program they are very proactive in the whole child. I saw not one, not two, not three, not four but whole classrooms of deaf/hard of hearing students succedding in an oral environment.
As a profoundly deaf person I was concerned about my ability to visit and really unerstand the school since I rely on ASL but was pleasantly surprised when many of the administrators and teachers signed. Some were more fluent than others but thats the case everywhere including Gallaudet.
What impressed me the most is that they do not just accept every deaf/hard of hearing child that walks through their door. They have extensive screenig to ensure that the program would benefit the child.
If after screening they feel the child would benefit more from a signing environement they have no hesitation in referring the parents to local deaf institutes including MSSD and MSD respectively.
Oral education dosnt work for every child, but it does work and as a deaf educator I have to respect that each child is different as well as their needs and make these assesments on a case by case basis.
Yes, I have visited the River School and met some staff there. The staff were very friendly and some of them were also signing well but not exactly fluent in ASL. They believe in using sign language as a bridge to spoken language for deaf children who received CI recently. They have a partnership with the CI center at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore.
I think 2 to 3 deaf students are enrolled in each class with about 12 hearing peers with a regular teacher and a speech therapist.
They only accept deaf students with nearly normal hearing using CI or hearing aids. Some school districts pay for the full tuition for deaf children at the River School. The school also collects donations for those who need financial aid. Their tuition is very expensive for a deaf student because of special services as it is twice the regular tuition for a hearing student.
They wanted to enroll my CI child very much although ASL is her first language and they respect ASL as our primary language. However, we decided not to enroll her there this time.
Jamie:
It may be that the reason why sign language is not mentioned on the mission statement of the River School is because the River School wants to keep it a primarily oral-focused educational approach. It sounds like they're willing to accommodate different communication needs, but with the focus of transitioning the deaf child to an oral approach.
I'm fine with that, actually, because using sign language from infancy and then transitioning the child to an oral approach would work best in helping the deaf child acquire language skills.
Post a Comment