Oral And Non Developmental Patterns

According to the data represented in the journal Symbolic Play and Novel Noun Learning in Deaf and Hearing Children: Longitudinal Effects of Access to Sound on Early Precursors of Language, the overall results demonstrate that deaf children with cochlear implants were delayed in comparison to children who do not display hearing conditions in their achievement of symbolic play and novel noun learning. In this study, 180 children with cochlear implants and 96 hearing children were used in this study, ages 5 months to 5 years old. Participants gathered in this research were gathered from 6 clinical implant centers along with two preschools that had enrolled normal hearing children. The purpose of this study is to show a difference

In today’s society there is an ongoing debate of weather children who are deaf should receive cochlear implants. A cochlear implant is a device that takes sound wave and changes the waves into electrical activity for the brain to interpret. Wire called electrodes are surgically implanted into the cochlear nerve which receives a signal from the microphone attached to the transmitter and speech processor. The microphone captures the sound from the environment and the speech processor filters the noise versus speech. Then the transmitter sends an electrical signal through the electrodes to stimulate the cochlear nerve. Every person has a different thought depending on their experiences in their life whether deaf children should receive cochlear

When your child is born, you want to make sure they're healthy. The doctors tell you that your child cannot hear and that he/she is a perfect candidate for a cochlear implant (CI). You have to decide, as a parent, whether to give he/her an implant and to be oral, not to give the implant and to be Deaf, or both. My decision is to give my child a CI, teach he/her to be oral, sign language, and being Deaf.

A Cochlear Implant is an electronic device that partially restores hearing in people who have severe hearing loss due to damage of the inner ear and who receive limited benefit from hearing aids (http://www.cochlear.com/wps/wcm/connect/au/home/understand/hearing-and-hl/hl-treatments/cochlear-implant). In some cases there are patients whose hearing did not adjust correctly, having a risk of developing a virus, complications after the surgery, the benefits of sign language without a cochlear implant and lastly children or adults with cochlear implants may not even develop a good speech. There are many positive and negative articles I have read on cochlear implants. As a parent you are not only putting your child at risk, you are also withdrawing them from the deaf community, the one they were naturally born into. I do not support cochlear implants, children should not be implanted until they are grown to the point where they can make their own choice

The second article, A Methodology for Assessing the Functions of Emerging Speech in Children with Developmental Disabilities by Lerman, Parten, Addison, Vorndran, Volkert, & Kodak, 2005 (2005), is about an experimental study aimed to develop and evaluate

Most doctors recommend that children with cochlear implant only use spoken language as a method of communication so they can maximize the benefits from the cochlear implant. However, the popular method of communication for children with cochlear implants is total communication which is the integration of oral communication and ASL. Although Heather Artinian was fluent in ASL before she received her cochlear implant, she was able to communicate with hearing and deaf people through both ASL and spoken language after years of intensive speech therapy (Aronson, Sound and Fury: Six Years Later). When cochlear implant users take it off, they cannot hear any sounds so they are technically still deaf. Even though they are able to hear sounds, cochlear implant recipients will not be able to identify themselves as hearing individuals. When they bridge the gap between the deaf and hearing world, they can still be a part of both cultures without defining themselves as a part of only one culture (TedX: The Heather World). Therefore, the cochlear implant can be a great device for deaf people who want to stay in the Deaf community but still be able to take advantage of additional opportunities in the hearing

The purpose of this evidence based research paper is to evaluate the efficacy of the cycles approach when compared to the traditional articulation therapy approach in the treatment of children who are highly unintelligible. The Cycles Phonological Remediation Approach (Hodson, 2011) is a treatment method for children with severe speech sound disorders. This approach targets phonological pattern errors in a sequential manner. During each cycle, one or more phonological patterns are targeted and after each cycle is complete, another cycle begins. Recycling of phonological patterns continues until the targeted patterns are generalized into the child’s conversational speech. The cycles approach is meant to mirror typical phonological development in children (Hodson, 2011).

The younger you are implanted the better the chances of being able to fully hear are. The older you are when implanted the less likely the chances of being able to fully hear are. In 2010 it was reported that over 40 million Americans are older than 65 years old, of those 40 million many will most likely experience hearing loss. By the year of 2050, the amount of senior citizens will increase by 147%(Sladen, D. P., & Zappler, A. (2015)). That is more people with hearing loss and that means a growing need for an implant that may or may not work because of the age of the user. "An estimated 65% of people 10 years and older have a hearing impairment(Sladen, D. P., & Zappler, A. (2015))." With the older a person becomes the more hearing loss they have. While losing hearing it would be very difficult to gain hearing back with an implant. By implanting a child at a young age you still need to work with the to train the how to use the implants. There has been new resources for teacher and therapists of children who have been implanted with cochlear implants. They are called musical ears and they help improve the child's musicality at a young age (Musical resources for working with children with CIs. (2010, August). The Hearing Review, 17(9), 48).That is why it is very important that if one is thinking about being implanted or implanting a child it should be done at a young

In 2008 cochlear announces 120,000 Nucleus cochlear implant recipients, designed for sufferers of high frequency hearing loss 2009 cochlear nucleus 5 system released. Cochlear is the state-of-art headquarters and manufacturing facility, a research and technology hub dedicated to pioneering the future of hearing innovation. A total amount of number recipients helped by Cochlear exceeds 250,000 worldwide and they became an 5 upgrade for Nucleus 24 implant recipients. Children and adults who are deaf got cochlear implant and it changed their lives ever since they got them because they were once deaf and now they can some what hear what people tell them

This article "I Have a Child With a Cochlear Implant in My Preschool Classroom. Now, What?" by Carrie A. Davenport and Sheila R. Albert-Morgan dealt with the issue of exploring the fact that although cochlear implant technology is progressing rapidly through the years, there is however still a lack of capacity at the school level. This article also provides awareness of what individualized education program (IEP) teams can practice while raising the learning skills of a deaf child who uses cochlear implants. The main focus of this article is to help teachers provide the best education for children who are deaf and use cochlear implants while in classrooms, by implementing ways teachers can provide the appropriate accommodations to their students,

According to the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, “About 2 to 3 out of every 1,000 children in the United States are born with a detectable level of hearing loss in one or both ears.” Cochlear Implants are mechanical devices that are highly promoted by the hearing society to “cure” deafness. Despite the fact Cochlear Implants can be effective, the risk of serious physical and emotional harm to a patient outweighs the chances of its success.

The following search procedures were used to locate the studies that met the inclusion criteria; however, applicable studies may have potentially been overlooked. Electronic searches of various databases included Cochrane Library, Academic Search Premier, Google Scholar, CINAHL, CREDO reference, LexisNexis, and ASHA. The keywords used were aural rehabilitation, cochlear implants, language development, phonological awareness, phonemic awareness, literacy, hearing loss, and deaf.

Ibrahim, Kilpatrick, Reilly, and Vogel (2009) performed a comparative study of the acoustic measures of hypernasality in the speech of school-aged children aged 2-14 years, some with cleft lip/palate and others without cleft lip/palate. Ibrahim, Kilpatrick, Reilly, and Vogel (2009) provided perceptual ratings of the hyper/hyponasality of vowel production in the children’s speech. Any child who was sick or had acquired an upper respiratory infection was excluded from the study, as was any child with cleft lip/palate who also had any other disorders or comorbidities. The study included a perceptual assessment in which two speech therapists were required to agree upon the perception of the phonemes the child produced. Each child held and sustained two vowels, followed by production of two CVC words without nasal phonemes. This process was repeated five times with each child. The

In the article “Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches” the authors talked about children need regularly and meaningfully accessible to human language. Children that have not acquired a language in the early years might never speak fluently in any language. This critical period is for children to develop their first language skills. Most children that are born deaf in the developed countries have cochlear devices implanted, but these devices do not offer accessible language to many deaf children. This device might cause the child to miss the critical period that is needed for children.

The 52 children were then compared with a control group made up of 48 children (with no pharyngeal flaps); Twenty-seven of the children had clefts of the lip and palate (CLP) and the other 21 children had clefts of the palate only (CP). Evaluation of speech and language proficiency was made on each child’s birthday from three years of age through adolescence (Riski, 1979). The oral-nasal balance was screened via conversational speech by a highly qualified speech pathologist. If a child’s oral-nasal resonance was within normal limits, it was marked as “acceptable”. On the contrary, if a child’s oral-nasal resonance was not within normal limits, it was marked as “unacceptable”. Overall, results of this study suggested that children who had pharyngeal-flap surgery were delayed in speech sound acquisition. Articulation for each child was measured using the Templin Darley 50-Item Screening Test. To obtain an analysis, the scores of each child were compared to the mean scores of Templin’s (1957) normative sample. Articulation developmental was measured by dividing the study group by cleft type. The two cleft groups were then compared to the non-cleft group tested by Templin (1957). Findings suggested that the CLP group followed the same curve as the normal, although it was usually a year behind the normal group (Riski, 1979). Comparatively, the CLP-F children demonstrated a much slower rate of articulation acquisition before the age of six years than did the CLP children. Additionally, between the ages of six and eight years, the CLP-F children demonstrated a rapid increase in the acquisition of speech sounds and were catching up to the speech proficiency demonstrated by the CLP group. Similarly, the CP and CP-F groups were compared.