Change the future for a deaf child

[dreama]

dreama,

how do you explain children who have been successful using an oral-only approach? should their success be ignored just because most deaf people cannot benefit from being in an oral environment?

It depends what you term as successful?

A girl at the PHU was considered 'successful'. She was asked to give talks to the other kids about being deaf. They Exibited her as an oral success. The next I heard she was in prison for prostitution. Then I heard she was homeless. What a success?

I don't know any cases of oral only deaf people who I would consider successful. Only those who use sign language AND speech and some who use sign language and written english.

 

[dreama]

Not very many. The NFB would not have "Braille leaders are leaders" if there was no need for braille, more blind people get jobs, and more higher paying jobs than blind people who dont know braille.

I totally agree. It's sad when the blind aren't taught braille and have to rely on highly magnified print or tapes. How on earth do they manage to label things. Supposing their tape recorder breaks down.

All Blind and low vision children need to learn braille. Same as all Deaf and hard of hearing children need to be taught sign language.

 

[dreama]

Fewer Blind Americans Learning and Using Braille

Here is a source. Only 10 percent of blind people know braille.

Some consider it obsolete. In the workplace readers like what Hear Again has are used more than braille.

Just because that's the case doesn't mean it's a good thing. about 70 per cent of blind don't work.

In my view it's something to be concerned about since their is no reason why anyone who is just blind shouldn't have a job.

 

[shel90]

I totally agree. It's sad when the blind aren't taught braille and have to rely on highly magnified print or tapes. How on earth do they manage to label things. Supposing their tape recorder breaks down.

All Blind and low vision children need to learn braille. Same as all Deaf and hard of hearing children need to be taught sign language.

It is all about giving each child all the tools instead of restricting them to one tool which is why I dont believe in the oral-only approach for deaf kids.

 

[Hear Again]

Just because that's the case doesn't mean it's a good thing. about 70 per cent of blind don't work.

In my view it's something to be concerned about since their is no reason why anyone who is just blind shouldn't have a job.

the 70% unemployment rate of the blind has more to do with discrimination than it does with braille illiteracy.

 

[Hear Again]

It is all about giving each child all the tools instead of restricting them to one tool which is why I dont believe in the oral-only approach for deaf kids.

i believe in an oral-only approach for deaf children (particularly those with ci's) for whom it has been proven effective. at the same time, i also believe that *all* deaf children (including those with ci's) should also be fluent in asl.

 

[Hear Again]

I totally agree. It's sad when the blind aren't taught braille and have to rely on highly magnified print or tapes. How on earth do they manage to label things. Supposing their tape recorder breaks down.

if their tape recorder stops working, a blind person can use a digital recorder, they could make notes on their computer and save it in notepad or wordpad and they could use hi-marks to label devices like ovens and microwaves. where there's a will, there's a way.

many elderly people who are blind live independently and are able to function without braille, so it can be done.

 

[Hear Again]

It depends what you term as successful?

A girl at the PHU was considered 'successful'. She was asked to give talks to the other kids about being deaf. They Exibited her as an oral success. The next I heard she was in prison for prostitution. Then I heard she was homeless. What a success?

I don't know any cases of oral only deaf people who I would consider successful. Only those who use sign language AND speech and some who use sign language and written english.

dreama,

what on earth are you taking about? what does the person in your post, an oral education and prostitution have to do with anything? how can you blame her prostitution on the fact that she was educated orally? that's quite a stretch if you ask me. <eyeroll>

just because you don't know any oral-only deaf people who are successful doesn't mean they don't exist. i happen to know many of them -- including children and adults with ci's.

 

[shel90]

i believe in an oral-only approach for deaf children (particularly those with ci's) for whom it has been proven effective. at the same time, i also believe that *all* deaf children (including those with ci's) should also be fluent in asl.

I dont...cuz in so many cases people are so in denieal to what is considered "effective" and they keep the children in the environment when it is just restricting them even more. I have seen tooo many cases like that and the childred end up with lasting negative effects. I would rather give both to all deaf children when they are small instead of later when it has been proved that oralism is no longer working for the child. It is just not worth destroying their future for.

 

[shel90]

the 70% unemployment rate of the blind has more to do with discrimination than it does with braille illiteracy.

Why not make life easier for the blind by teaching all of them braille? Why make things more difficult for blind and deaf people...give them all of the tools so they can grow up knowing and understanding all the tools that are available to them instead of suffering thinking that this one way is the "only" way.

 

[Jiro]

Why not make life easier for the blind by teaching all of them braille? Why make things more difficult for blind and deaf people...give them all of the tools so they can grow up knowing and understanding all the tools that are available to them instead of suffering thinking that this one way is the "only" way.

which is why I hope Obama Administration will create a federal standard

 

[Nika]

I know that, but i am obviously the only one with my opinion. so i am going to keep it to myself. If you want i will pm you.

You're definitely not alone in your opinion, typeing. I happen to be of the same opinion as you.

 

[Nika]

many elderly people who are blind live independently and are able to function without braille, so it can be done.

Sure it can be done, but why not offer blind people that other channel? What's the harm in giving blind people another tool to use?

 

[Daredevel7]

I love how people advocate "more tools" and bash on those who want to use primarily one approach AND YET they also bash on Total Communication, which has more tools than anything else. Talk about inconsistency there.

 

[faire_jour]

I dont...cuz in so many cases people are so in denieal to what is considered "effective" and they keep the children in the environment when it is just restricting them even more. I have seen tooo many cases like that and the childred end up with lasting negative effects. I would rather give both to all deaf children when they are small instead of later when it has been proved that oralism is no longer working for the child. It is just not worth destroying their future for.

But isn't a voice off school limiting too? A child can never develop fluency in a language mode they are never exposed to or taught.

 

[shel90]

I love how people advocate "more tools" and bash on those who want to use primarily one approach AND YET they also bash on Total Communication, which has more tools than anything else. Talk about inconsistency there.

My problem with total communication is that they attempt to use all the tools at the same time for each lesson and usually the teachers end up Sim-comming which usually gives the inappropriate models of both languages to the deaf children. TC doesn't have a clear and defined standard so usually the people working there attempt to mix all the tools together creating a lingusitically confusing environment for the children. With the BiBi approach, there is a set policy to keep both languages separate and in their true forms so the children can get the appropriate models of each languages.

 

[shel90]

But isn't a voice off school limiting too? A child can never develop fluency in a language mode they are never exposed to or taught.

Hmmmm..really? I was in avoice on only environment and I practically had no access to language, information, and communication at least 90% of the time.

Besides, many of my students, despite in an "voice off" environment as u called are able to use both languages effectively and successfully so I don't know how is that restrictive.


Besides..many of our students have good oral skills while others don't but at least EVERYONE has full and 100% access to everything regardless of their speech skills. That's the whole point of education.

 

[Daredevel7]

My problem with total communication is that they attempt to use all the tools at the same time for each lesson and usually the teachers end up Sim-comming which usually gives the inappropriate models of both languages to the deaf children. TC doesn't have a clear and defined standard so usually the people working there attempt to mix all the tools together creating a lingusitically confusing environment for the children. With the BiBi approach, there is a set policy to keep both languages separate and in their true forms so the children can get the appropriate models of each languages.

You said that in TC, teachers "end up" Sim-comming which implies that they are not really following procedures, and basically just "give in" because sim-comming is easier? Just trying to see why wouldn't the "linguistically confusing environment" also apply for the BiBi programs? I understand that there's standard models for languages and they are kept separate. Easier said than done.

 

[Jiro]

I love how people advocate "more tools" and bash on those who want to use primarily one approach AND YET they also bash on Total Communication, which has more tools than anything else. Talk about inconsistency there.

lol yea. that's why we need to have a federal standard - the tool that works for majority... which is probably BiBi (ASL).

 

[Nika]

I love how people advocate "more tools" and bash on those who want to use primarily one approach AND YET they also bash on Total Communication, which has more tools than anything else. Talk about inconsistency there.

I don't oppose teaching English Deaf children. I think that English should be taught alongside ASL (or whatever the spoken language and signed language is of a given region). If a Deaf person works on English and ASL, that gives them more opportunities. They have a window into the hearing world as well as the Deaf world.

I also don't see how having blind children learn Braille opposed Total Communication. In fact I think it opens a lot of windows, because they can take their own notes on a Perkins, they have access to a huge library of books (the NLS). I think blind people are just as entitled to literacy as sighted people. And for blind people cannot read print or even large print, then braille is their form of being literate.

Sure, a Deaf person can survive with English only, a blind person can survive without braille. But why not offer those two extra windows of opportunity?