Re: Auditory Verbal

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/7/00 3:51:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, AVHear2@...

writes:

<< We do revieve our AV therapy through the school...took a

while but we are thrilled

>>

how did you do this? what did it say on your IEP? Where the words AV on it?

Thanks for any input.

Tammy Norman

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/7/00 12:51:35 PM Eastern Standard Time,

heidi_smart@... writes:

<<

Curious, for those parents who receive Auditory Verbal services for

their child, how many receive it through the public school system?

Thanks. >>

We have received AV since was 1 1/2 from the local School for the Deaf.

To my knowledge our county schools do not have any trained AVT on staff. We

are having a difficult time getting the public school to provide AV for

since he just turned 3 and is transitioning from IFSP to IEP.

Tammy Norman in North Carolina

[Guest guest]

Tammy,

The key mostly is to hang onto the " least restrictive " . Because

AV children learn auditorly and do not need speech persay that means that an

untrained SLP is not the least restrictive for them. This is where I think

we come into a touchy area...is AV a method or a mode of communication. Most

SLP's have no training in the area of HOH, and their training approach would

be that of a visual nature, in most cases. There again you show it is not

the least restrictive for your child because your child's mode of

communication is auditory. It is in our IEP that the least restrictive

environment for my girls was a trained professional in the mode of

communication they know. Our battle wasn''t getting them to except that,

that was true, it was getting a trained professional in our area. We got

lucky...one moved here. At the very least sometimes the best you can fight

for is an inservice with all the teachers that will work with your child. I

know in one of the counties close to us the family fought for AV and the

school ended up sending two of the teachers to a week at the BeeBe center. I

will tell you that for the last 2 years we had to work with our schools SLP.

She was wonderful and tried to learn all she could about AV and adapt her

approach. Several weeks ago they started with the AV therapist and it was

clear to me how much we missed even though the SLP tried. I hope this helps

some, and I am sure there are some parents out there that can help better

with the wording for an IEP. We have been lucky since the girls are the only

AV kids in the district the school believes everything I say LOLOLOL.

Ann

[Guest guest]

Some random thoughts here on a day without breakfast, lunch or dinner

and 7 hours spent walking a huge fiberoptics convention wiht 450

vendors:

You have a right to insist that your child's mode of communication be

honored. That modality is spoken English. In order to support the

development of that ability, your child needs appropriate supports.

Therefore he/she must be taught to use their residual hearing. That is

where the auditory verbal/auditory oral part comes in. A speech

therapist that can teach your child appropriately is necessary to train

your child. Ethically, they are not allowed to work outside the

parameters of their training. I'm not sure if I understand your

comments, " AV children learn auditorily and do not need speech persay. "

They do need speech if they are to speak appropriately, develop

appropriate vocabulary and optimize their listening skills. This is the

responsibility of the SLP.

In order to ensure equal access to English language, your child may need

an oral interpreter. Because the child has to have equal access to

information presented in their native language....English.

I agree with Celeste. NEVER say it's a methodology. Case law

definitely states that you can not dictate a methodology of

instruction. Some case law has even gone so far (under the old IDEA

regs) to say that you can not choose your child's modality of

communication as long as the school system makes an effort to ensure

equal access in the modality of THEIR choice. That is why we fought so

hard to get the wording changed to state that parents had a right to

choose their child's modality of communication and that educators must

honor it. The wording was diluted to say that the school system must

" acknowledge " a child's modality of communication. Around here, the

word " acknowledge " has been interpreted to mean respect and support.

Other schools systems may say, " Gee, we acknowledge that your child uses

ABC modality of communication, but here he/she will use ours. " The key

is to try to keep everything under the umbrella of modality of

communication and equal access. It's the only way you stand a chance.

Just a start.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/9/00 5:06:13 PM Eastern Standard Time,

celestej@... writes:

<< First, in answer to the question, " ...is AV a method or a mode of

communication? " one should, at all costs, avoid the word " methodology. "

The Supreme Court has consistently affirmed that methodology is not a

hearable issue. If it is not hearable, it is not open for

consideration on an IEP. Additionally, looking at case law, I do not

believe one could call AV a mode of communication. Modes of

communication are things like voice, sign language (inclusive of all

varieties) cued speech, writing, etc. It is my opinion that your best

bet is to refer to AV as an educational philosophy or approach, just as

one would with Auditory/Oral, Total Communication, Bi/Bi, etc.

Subsumed within those educational philosophies or approaches, are

specific methodologies which are compatible with the approach. >>

Well, I was reminded this week why I always stay out of the school

discussions...I am so sorry if I stepped on someone's toes, and very lightly

answered how we got AVT for our daughters in school. Promise, I will not do

that again. I was coming at this from a different direction, based on the

fact that the federal law has been updated requiring the school districts to

consider the hearing impaired child's mode of communication when preparing

his IEP. Yes, you are right auditory-verbal is a way of life and a

philosophy. Because we advocate following normal sequential patters of

speech and language development, it is possible that we may need to go at

this by stating normal hearing persons are auditory-verbal in their

communication. I have asked to borrow this next statement from a

professional in the field who is working through a hearing of this nature at

this time.... " We receive messages through our auditory system and they are

deciphered and encoded and decoded by our brain. We in turn learn to use our

auditory feedback system to develop speech and spoken communication in

naturally occurring contexts while interacting with others and our

environment " That is a small look of what is being purposed at hearings in

favor of mode of communication instead of method. And in the use of " least

restrictive " I again apologize for not going into more detail...No need to do

that now, I think all those bases where covered. I humbly send this with

respect to all families choices, and struggles with the school districts...an

area which I will now stay out of.