Cued Speech: your opinion?

[shel90]

Damn Jillo! U r making me feel likle I am back in my Linguistics 501 and 502 classes! LOL

 

[jillio]

Damn Jillo! U r making me feel likle I am back in my Linguistics 501 and 502 classes! LOL

LOL! Just trying to do what I do.....educate. Maybe with an understanding of linguistics, those that are buying into the CS propoganda being spread witll be able to think critically for themselves.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Better yet, fingerspell it.

I can just feel the arthritis setting in....

I agree with Rockdrummer! You're evil!

 

[jillio]

I can just feel the arthritis setting in....

I agree with Rockdrummer! You're evil!

I try, LOL!

 

[loml]

Cueing is about literacy,

It has nothing to do with it, I experienced cued speech, You didn't, so it doesn't make you an expert on cued speech, that's what I'm agreeing with Cloggy about.

Cheri -I believe that experiencing/learning the system of CS is essential to understanding the how’s, whys and the "ah haw’s" of CS. Cueing is a "body and mind" experience.

Having book knowledge about anything in life does not equate to first hand/ hands on experience. Learning by doing is the only way to learn, imo.

We are all individuals and we will take from a hands on experience learning opportunity what we choose. I have yet to meet any individual deaf/hoh or hearing, who has chosen not to acknowledge/feel that "ah haw moment" of cueing.

Cueing for me is about literacy and improving the quality of education. The sharing of information about a tool that can/does make the learning process of English easier, in a world where there are many obstacles, is paramount to me.

 

[jillio]

Cheri -I believe that experiencing/learning the system of CS is essential to understanding the how’s, whys and the "ah haw’s" of CS. Cueing is a "body and mind" experience.

Having book knowledge about anything in life does not equate to first hand/ hands on experience. Learning by doing is the only way to learn, imo.

With us all being individual, we will take from a hands on experience learning opportunity what we choose. I have yet to meet any individual deaf/hoh or hearing, who has chosen not to acknowledge/feel that "ah haw moment" of cueing.

Cueing for me is about literacy and improving the quality education. The sharing of information about a tool that can/does make the learning process of English easier, in a world where there are many obstacles, is paramount to me.

Look around this board. You will find many deaf people who have experienced the "Ah, ha!" moment. It was "Ah,ha! That's why it doesn't work!"

 

[shel90]

Absolutely there will be some successes and some failures with anything. But when evaluating a system, and promoting it for widespread use, however, one looks at overall success and failure rates, and the benefit to the population as a whole. When that has been done with CS inthe past as well as currently, it is determined that it does not provide benefit in increasing literacy for the majority of the population. That is not to say that it can't be used selectively as a supplement for an individual. That is simply to say, that as a widespread and recommeded primary communication tool or as a widespread educational methodology, it is not effective. Some people can beat their children througout their childhood and still manage to end up with a well adjusted and high functioning kid. Does that mean that we should promote this particualr parenting technique for all parents? I think not.

I think many people here forget that we are trained in this field and we have been trained to evaluate several systems. We cant promote a system that has been shown not to increase literacy levels of a population or that will make us just as responsible for the failure of the system.

However, I think CS is good as a teaching tool not as a promotion for language development.

 

[shel90]

LOL! Just trying to do what I do.....educate. Maybe with an understanding of linguistics, those that are buying into the CS propoganda being spread witll be able to think critically for themselves.

Linguistics classes helped me understand the structure and roots of language development. It was hard to get there cuz at first, I didnt understand it at all but once I started applying it, it was like a light bulb went off.

 

[jillio]

I think many people here forget that we are trained in this field and we have been trained to evaluate several systems. We cant promote a system that has been shown not to increase literacy levels of a population or that will make us just as responsible for the failure of the system.

However, I think CS is good as a teaching tool not as a promotion for language development.

Agreed! I see it most valuable as an individual tutoring tool rather than as a classroom methodology. It can be used with those individuals who are able to gain benefit from it without jepordizing the education of those who find it less than beneficial.

Exactly. To promote a system that has does not have proven efficacy is unethical.

 

[jillio]

Linguistics classes helped me understand the structure and roots of language development. It was hard to get there cuz at first, I didnt understand it at all but once I started applying it, it was like a light bulb went off.

That was your "Ah,ha" moment. You already knew from experience that oral only was not the best way to promote language acquisition. Then, the knowledge gained from your linguiistics classseslet you understand why what you already knew was true.

 

[shel90]

That was your "Ah,ha" moment. You already knew from experience that oral only was not the best way to promote language acquisition. Then, the knowledge gained from your linguiistics classseslet you understand why what you already knew was true.

And that is exactly why I wouldnt promote the oral-only approach to deaf children even though I was successful with it. I don't have blinders on and I wont use myself as a poster child to promote the oralism methodology just cuz it worked for me (to a degree).

 

[loml]

I think many people here forget that we are trained in this field and we have been trained to evaluate several systems. We cant promote a system that has been shown not to increase literacy levels of a population or that will make us just as responsible for the failure of the system.

However, I think CS is good as a teaching tool not as a promotion for language development.

shel90- From your statement, it appears that you are under the illusion that you are the only "trained" individual that participates on this board: you could not be further from the truth. Rather pompous actually.

CS has and continues to improve literacy levels of its users.

If you think that CS is a good teaching tool, then exactly what is it a "good teaching tool" for and why?

 

[shel90]

shel90- From your statement, it appears that you are under the illusion that you are the only "trained" individual that participate on this board: you could not be further from the truth. Rather pompous actually.

CS has and continues to improve literacy levels of its users.

If you think that CS is a good teaching tool, then exactly what is it a "good teaching tool" for and why?

The only "trained" one here on this thread? Where did I say those exact words?

If I said that, yes that would make me pompous but I didnt say that so by reading too much into my words and making assumptions based on your interpretations without asking for clarification from me is pretty pompous.

Anyways..CS has been available for 40 years and why hasnt the literacy issues of deaf children improved if CS was the answer? U are the expert in CS so can u answer that?

I think it works as a teaching tool to guide with reading if the student has a good grasp of language first. The key word here is "think" meaning it is my opinion, not a fact. Big difference, loml. In my orginal statement, u see the key word, right? Nobody has to follow my opinion, right?

However, u are stating that it has improved literacy so it must be a fact. So, why arent many of us are still struggling with literacy if the system has been in use for 40 years?

 

[loml]

And that is exactly why I wouldnt promote the oral-only approach to deaf children even though I was successful with it. I don't have blinders on and I wont use myself as a poster child to promote the oralism methodology just cuz it worked for me (to a degree).

shel90 - What does

oral only

have to do with CS?

 

[deafskeptic]

The only "trained" one here on this thread? Where did I say those exact words?

If I said that, yes that would make me pompous but I didnt say that so by reading too much into my words and making assumptions based on your interpretations without asking for clarification from me is pretty pompous.

Anyways..CS has been available for 40 years and why hasnt the literacy issues of deaf children improved if CS was the answer? U are the expert in CS so can u answer that?

I think it works as a teaching tool to guide with reading if the student has a good grasp of language first. The key word here is "think" meaning it is my opinion, not a fact. Big difference, loml. In my orginal statement, u see the key word, right? Nobody has to follow my opinion, right?

However, u are stating that it has improved literacy so it must be a fact. So, why arent many of us are still struggling with literacy if the system has been in use for 40 years?

Wow. You've certainly asked some hard questions here.

 

[shel90]

shel90 - What does have to do with CS?

as u can see, it was a direct response to Jillo's post.

 

[loml]

as u can see, it was a direct response to Jillo's post.

shel90- Which has nothing to do with the op.

 

[shel90]

shel90- Which has nothing to do with the op.

Opps, I went off topic..I am not perfect. Life is too short to sweat the small stuff so if it really bothers u, report me.

 

[loml]

Shel90 - You said this:

I think many people here forget that we are trained in this field and we have been trained to evaluate several systems. We cant promote a system that has been shown not to increase literacy levels of a population or that will make us just as responsible for the failure of the system

Shel90 - I did not say that. I said:

From your statement, it appears that you are under the illusion that you are the only "trained" individual that participates on this board: you could not be further from the truth. Rather pompous actually.

That, imo, does not equal this:

The only "trained" one here on this thread? Where did I say those exact words?

originally posted by Shel90-

If I said that, yes that would make me pompous but I didnt say that so by reading too much into my words and making assumptions based on your interpretations without asking for clarification from me is pretty pompous.

Shel90-

Anyways..CS has been available for 40 years and why hasnt the literacy issues of deaf children improved if CS was the answer? U are the expert in CS so can u answer that?

The answer in one word is attitude.

Shel90-

I think it works as a teaching tool to guide with reading if the student has a good grasp of language first. The key word here is "think" meaning it is my opinion, not a fact. Big difference, loml. In my orginal statement, u see the key word, right? Nobody has to follow my opinion, right?

I have asked this question of other people on this board, and yet to have an answer. What is it about CS that leads you to form the opion of:

it works as a teaching tool to guide with reading if the student has a good grasp of language first??

You have an opinion/thought about a system that you have never trained in or used based on what exactly? How can you from an educational perspective evaluate CS when you do not use it and have not learned it? .

Shel90 -

However, u are stating that it has improved literacy so it must be a fact. So, why arent many of us are still struggling with literacy if the system has been in use for 40 years?

I answered this earlier and I shall answer it again in one word: attitude.

 

[VamPyroX]

You forgetting one thing Jillio, There are pros and cons to everything! There will be some success stories there will also be unsuccess stories. It doesn't mean cued speech is a failure for the deaf.

Of course...

It's like those informercials on television... "RESULTS VARY".

It varies on the individual and how they're taught.