Best way to develop oral skills?

Status
Not open for further replies.
shel90 said:
Right...but unfortunately, to many people, deaf children wont be able to survive in the hearing world unless they can function like hearing people so people will continue to keep the oral-only philosophy alive.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
faire_jour said:
I am curious, have people here asked parents why they chose spoken language for their child? I think that there are a lot of assumptions being made, maybe if people found out why parents choose that path, rather than just calling them "oralists", perhaps bridges could be built. Maybe if ASL advocates understood why parents choose spoken language or oral schools, they could help parents see the value in ASL in addition to spoken language. Instead of calling names, protesting, and fighting, people could come together for the benefit of the children.
Click to expand...

Those questions have been asked, and answered with the same answers, for centuries.
 
faire_jour said:
I am curious, have people here asked parents why they chose spoken language for their child? I think that there are a lot of assumptions being made, maybe if people found out why parents choose that path, rather than just calling them "oralists", perhaps bridges could be built. Maybe if ASL advocates understood why parents choose spoken language or oral schools, they could help parents see the value in ASL in addition to spoken language. Instead of calling names, protesting, and fighting, people could come together for the benefit of the children.
Click to expand...

Trust me, that has been tried such as with my program trying a partnership with a major hospital/CI center only to get rejected simply because we use ASL. This center has written letters to our program stating that their interest is not promoting ASL and wont have a vested interest in partnering with our program unless we adopt their oral-only philosophies.

Like Jillio said, it has been tried for decades by advocates of the Deaf community but a majority of hearing people do not take us seriously. Even after ASL was determined to be a language, there was still a public resistant to it.

I think in the 90s, it got better but now with the changes in the FDA regarding the age of implantation, it seems we are going back to square one again.
 
jillio said:
Those questions have been asked, and answered with the same answers, for centuries.
Click to expand...

Oralism is said to have come into existance in the USA in the 1860s so has this been going on before the start of AGBAD?
 
deafskeptic said:
Oralism is said to have come into existance in the USA in the 1860s so has this been going on before the start of AGBAD?
Click to expand...

Oh,yeah! AGBad popularized the oral movement, and gave it more organization. But it existed prior, in philosophy, as far back as Socrates and Hippocrates.
 
deafskeptic said:
Oralism is said to have come into existance in the USA in the 1860s so has this been going on before the start of AGBAD?
Click to expand...

It existed centuries ago in rich families to allow their deaf children to inherit as you could not if you were deaf and mute.
 
faire_jour said:
I am curious, have people here asked parents why they chose spoken language for their child? *etc*
Click to expand...


I think basically you should grasp the concept behind it.. No offense, but I have been observing now that people keep questioning things that are of the impossible to have a solid answer for. They can only offer "major consensus" advice, not experimental program "alpha testing and benefits observed while in progress".


Some deafs perhaps never care for a speaking ability. If they are born profoundly deaf, preferred to seek a profound deaf life, what are you to say to influence them to speak?

Everyone learns the written language after an initial phase of their lives, writing becomes an important tool of a deaf person. I think no one will disagree that writing proficiency is important.

What seems to be the encouragement is for a child born deaf at birth, by deaf I am referring to requiring a HA of some sort to hear general conversation; that they take some form of signed language because they can coincidentally miss out on a lot if they do not hear it.

This is where the L1 (sign) language facilitates a L2 language for them to become eventually proficient in that form.

But speaking (and the creative grammar/ language complexity/ cognitive thinking) seems to be a complete optional category only if the family WANTS their children to be proficient in this.

There's no point to advocating Speech for someone else just because you think so; perhaps they did not want to be proficient in speech...?

I surely hope you do read some of what is written not just in this post, but in the rest of the topic, and please read it thoroughly.. there are lots of viewpoints and suggestions made, but there are no YES and NO answers.

Perhaps you will have your own answers reflective of Miss Kat when she grows older.. but you can only make her choices for her, little will you be aware of what she actually wants when she is in her teens.
 
shel90 said:
Trust me, that has been tried such as with my program trying a partnership with a major hospital/CI center only to get rejected simply because we use ASL. This center has written letters to our program stating that their interest is not promoting ASL and wont have a vested interest in partnering with our program unless we adopt their oral-only philosophies.

Like Jillio said, it has been tried for decades by advocates of the Deaf community but a majority of hearing people do not take us seriously. Even after ASL was determined to be a language, there was still a public resistant to it.

I think in the 90s, it got better but now with the changes in the FDA regarding the age of implantation, it seems we are going back to square one again.
Click to expand...

It's not the deaf who's at fault here.
 
Personally I think it is near impossible for someone to become a "native" golden child who can speak like an "intelligent hearing person", write and think like a professor, and signs like a native ASL user.

Yes perhaps there are exceptions. But ignoring these exceptions..

The following is just my hypothesis, anyway:

It would have to be some form of new language where both languages are combined at the same time.
Say if I wanted to learn to speak, write, and form grammar chains as a native in American English and as a native in Russian:

I would probably need to be spoke/conversed to with Russian and English at the same time in order to understand the complexities behind both languages.

This would be equivalent to saying something like:

"Эй леди give яблоко to me."
That basically was a weird way of saying, "Lady, give the apple to me."

Do you see anyone speaking like this out there? No way. People are choosing one one first, then learning the other later.
 
naisho said:
Personally I think it is near impossible for someone to become a "native" golden child who can speak like an "intelligent hearing person", write and think like a professor, and signs like a native ASL user.

Yes perhaps there are exceptions. But ignoring these exceptions..

The following is just my hypothesis, anyway:

It would have to be some form of new language where both languages are combined at the same time.
Say if I wanted to learn to speak, write, and form grammar chains as a native in American English and as a native in Russian:

I would probably need to be spoke/conversed to with Russian and English at the same time in order to understand the complexities behind both languages.

This would be equivalent to saying something like:

"Эй леди give яблоко to me."
That basically was a weird way of saying, "Lady, give the apple to me."

Do you see anyone speaking like this out there? No way. People are choosing one one first, then learning the other later.
Click to expand...


Right, that's why SEE and Sim-Com arent encouraged by the linguistics for language development.
 
shel90 said:
Right, that's why SEE and Sim-Com arent encouraged by the linguistics for language development.
Click to expand...

Or the educational, developomental, or cognitive spychologists, either. Confusing linguistic input.
 
Sometimes I get the feeling that some deaf people feel that the society should cater to them. We even have laws for this. We have the right to have an interpreter or any other services for almost everything.

This is a nice thought but sometimes I think it's naive. For the minority, the real world simply sucks.

Supporting oral skills isn't a pretty thing to do. If you support them and there are many deaf people who just can't develop them well enough to communicate with any hearing person comfortably, they just feel like they have failed. How do you support oral skills while saying that you don't technically need them?
 
I just read this thread for the first time today, at least I think so! I have hardly been on here ...

I had speech therapy on a daily basis (Monday-Friday, that is) from about age 2 to age 15. In 5th grade, which is when I would have been about 10 years old, my speech teacher threw up his hands one day and said "I give up." He meant it humorously, but also that I had not improved since he started with me in 2nd grade. I don't think I improved at all from 3rd-5th grade until I discontinued it at age 15, but at least I "kept up" with my skills instead of letting them deteriorate. I never minded the speech time -- it was a great excuse to get out of an otherwise boring class (IMO) .. Maybe I just had a good perspective on what I was getting out of the speech therapy time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top