Cued Speech: your opinion?

[shel90]

Shel90 - You said this:

Shel90 - I did not say that. I said:

That, imo, does not equal this:

originally posted by Shel90-

Shel90-

The answer in one word is attitude.

Shel90-

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:

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 -

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

Attitude is not a good answer. It still doesnt give me a good answer to my question. Too general.

Ok, then if it is attitude then u are saying that those deaf children who werent able to benefit from CS because of their attitude?

See what I mean? This answer is just too general..attitude of who? The parents? The educators? The students?


U called me pompous because it appears that I am under the impression that I am the only one trained here. U either said it or didnt say it...but u did use those words, so your words, not mine. How u interpreted them, up to u but please take responsiblity for how you interpreted them instead of going around and trying to put the responsibility on me. We all interpret each other's post incorrectly sometimes but it would be nice if we take responsibility for our misinterpretation instead of blaming it on the other person.

If u want clarification, the reason I said what I said in my orginal statement was in response to why we cant promote CS as the approach to use because in our training, we evaluated the research and talked to experts in who have had experience with CS and they all agreed that it hasnt been proven to solve the literacy issues in Deaf ed.

By saying it is because of attitude is giving me the impression that you are putting the blame on others instead of the system itself. But then again, I asked first before making assumptions on the meaning of your answer.

If my response is not good enough for you, then maybe nothing I say will be good enough for u which is fine and might as well end our debate before we go in circles again.

 

[shel90]

and loml, I wanted to add...by saying I think doesnt mean that I am right and I have room for learning more about the subject in my opinion.

I know ASL is a language....that is a fact and there is nothing that will change my mind.

I think ASL is a language...that's my opinon and there is room for me to possible change my opinion or learn more about it.

Because I am seeing so much improvement with my students' literacy skills using the BiBi method, I am going to stick to it and not change it. Why fix it if it aint broken? However, if the kids' families at home want to use CS, their decision but since many of them arent consisent with the use of sign language in their home, it is more likely they wouldnt be consistent with CS. Remember, I told you that one teacher who used to work in the CS program at a public school told me that many of the parents werent consisent with using CS in the home?

 

[rick48]

And that's the difference the positive view of somebody who uses / used it and sees the benefit of CS compared to the negative view of someone who never used it and thinks knows what it is... but really does not...

Cloggy,

Fantastic post!

Thanks for writing what sorely needed to be written.

There are pros and cons with everything but this constant barage and
belittling of cued speech boarders on the absurd. It is clear that for many users of cued speech, it has been a benefit. I have yet to see anyone, even those for whom it did not benefit, say that it had a negative impact upon them.

Rick

 

[jillio]

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?

And, why is it that the "fact" being claimed cannot be supported empirically? If it is, indeed, fact, there should be more out there than individual anecdote to support the "fact."

 

[jillio]

Cloggy,

Fantastic post!

Thanks for writing what sorely needed to be written.

There are pros and cons with everything but this constant barage and
belittling of cued speech boarders on the absurd. It is clear that for many users of cued speech, it has been a benefit. I have yet to see anyone, even those for whom it did not benefit, say that it had a negative impact upon them.

Rick

The intent of any methodology is no improve, not maintain the status quo. It reallydoesn't matter if it has had a negative impact. It has not been shown to have a positive impact on literacy. Therefore, why would one take the time and make the effort to use a system that is providing no improvement. Time and energy should be devoted to using those things that improve literacy and function. If a kid reads at a 4th grade level before the introduction of CS, and still reads at a 4th grade level after the introduction of CS, what has been gained? If a child is 3 years language delayed prior to the introduction of CS, and remains 3 years language delayed after the introduction of CS, what has been improved? Why would you not devote the time and effort to utilizing those things that result in improvement? Oh, yeah, I forgot....because CS is easier for the hearing parent to learn. Yeah, that makes tons of sense!

 

[loml]

originally posted by Shel90-

why we cant promote CS as the approach to use because in our training, we evaluated the research and talked to experts in who have had experience with CS and they all agreed that it hasnt been proven to solve the literacy issues in Deaf ed.

The list of research that you evaluated is where and what? You say to have talked to experts who has experienced CS, what makes these people "experts in experiencing CS" Shel90?

originally posted by Shel90-

However, if the kids' families at home want to use CS, their decision but since many of them arent consisent with the use of sign language in their home, it is more likely they wouldnt be consistent with CS

Shel90 - Cueing is for the family unit first and foremost. Literacy in their language (I am not talking ASL here, this is not ASL vs CS!)The best role model for the family language and culture, is the family.

Shel90- The simple fact that people choose to negate a system, without first hand experience, imo, is attitude.

You say you have something that works: Good! That being said however, doesn't mean educators shouldn't be open to learning/trying something new.

I don't believe in making the learning of English a difficult task, for anyone.

 

[Cheri]

Of course...

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

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

Right.

 

[shel90]

originally posted by Shel90-

The list of research that you evaluated is where and what? You say to have talked to experts who has experienced CS, what makes these people "experts in experiencing CS" Shel90?

originally posted by Shel90-

Shel90 - Cueing is for the family unit first and foremost. Literacy in their language (I am not talking ASL here, this is not ASL vs CS!)The best role model for the family language and culture, is the family.

Shel90- The simple fact that people choose to negate a system, without first hand experience, imo, is attitude.

You say you have something that works: Good! That being said however, doesn't mean educators shouldn't be open to learning/trying something new.

I don't believe in making the learning of English a difficult task, for anyone.

Who is it that is negating the system?


Are u proposing the elimination of ASL in the schools and use CS instead as a visual respresentative to spoken English?

Like u said, cueing is for the family first and foremost so maybe u can tackle on those families who dont use it on a consistent basis and revert back to using only spoken language without any visual cues to it.

 

[loml]

Shel90 - Are you planning on answering my questions later or??

 

[shel90]

Shel90 - Are you planning on answering my questions later or??

about the experts? Ok...they are people who have worked in CS programs, (already gave u one person), students who came from CS programs and their parents, and research from my linguistics, language acquisition and literacy classes at Gallaudet University. Remmy, CS was invented at Gallaudet University so the research shown to us by the very same university where it was developed would hold some merit, wouldnt it?

 

[jillio]

Who is it that is negating the system?


Are u proposing the elimination of ASL in the schools and use CS instead as a visual respresentative to spoken English?

Like u said, cueing is for the family first and foremost so maybe u can tackle on those families who dont use it on a consistent basis and revert back to using only spoken language without any visual cues to it.

Here is what gets me: the line about educators being open to trying something new!Good Lord, CS is 40 years old, it was tried, and found to be relatively inneffective when compared to other methods, and at the age of 40, can hardly be considered to be new.

Even the Clerc Center is offering workshops on Visual Phonics rather than CS. Now there is something that is new and innovative and show promise.

Cueing was not developed as a system for the family. It was developed to improve receptive skills in oral English (i.e. speech reading) for the deaf individual so that literacy rates would improve. Convenience for the parents is simply a selling point that is being used since the attempt to revive a system that is at death's door.

Quite frankly, you have done a great job answering the questions posed.

 

[shel90]

Here is what gets me: the line about educators being open to trying something new!Good Lord, CS is 40 years old, it was tried, and found to be relatively inneffective when compared to other methods, and at the age of 40, can hardly be considered to be new.

Even the Clerc Center is offering workshops on Visual Phonics rather than CS. Now there is something that is new and innovative and show promise.

Cueing was not developed as a system for the family. It was developed to improve receptive skills in oral English (i.e. speech reading) for the deaf individual so that literacy rates would improve. Convenience for the parents is simply a selling point that is being used since the attempt to revive a system that is at death's door.

Quite frankly, you have done a great job answering the questions posed.

Because I am such a terrible person..I am gonna go off topic again. Visual phonics was brought up at my work today and our reading specialists are going to attend a workshop about it to learn more about it. If it is something that we can use, then sure, why not?

Everyone can slap me for going off-topic. Yes, I am so awful!

 

[loml]

Who is it that is negating the system?

Shel90 - When suggestions are made on how to use CS, in an incorrect, ill informed, inexperienced manner, that is negating the system, imo.

Are u proposing the elimination of ASL in the schools and use CS instead as a visual respresentative to spoken English?

Elimination of ASL, no (not sure how you came to that conclusion, care to explain?) I think CS and ASL should be used in deaf education.

Like u said, cueing is for the family first and foremost so maybe u can tackle on those families who dont use it on a consistent basis and revert back to using only spoken language without any visual cues to it.

Shel90 - I am not aware of any such familes.

 

[shel90]

Shel90 - When suggestions are made on how to use CS, in an incorrect, ill informed, inexperienced manner, that is negating the system, imo.



Elimination of ASL, no (not sure how you came to that conclusion, care to explain?) I think CS and ASL should be used in deaf education.



Shel90 - I am not aware of any such familes.

That's why I asked about elimination of ASL...u answered. Thank u.

U have been lucky to be exposed to families who have been consistent with it. People who have worked in CS programs before told me that there has been some families who have been consistent with it and some who havent...just like with sign language. I believe them because it was their experience and I am not going to be the one who tells them they are wrong.

Family Education at my school is investigating CS now but since I dont work in that dept, I dont know what's happening because they are in a different building under different supervision. I work in elementary education dealing with the students primarily. I cant help it if most of the students came from mainstreamed programs in which other kinds of methodologies have been used with them which didnt work for them and I, and other teachers have to do remedial work. The kids who have been in our program since babies are the ones performing higher than those who have been referred to our program at an older age.

 

[jillio]

Because I am such a terrible person..I am gonna go off topic again. Visual phonics was brought up at my work today and our reading specialists are going to attend a workshop about it to learn more about it. If it is something that we can use, then sure, why not?

Everyone can slap me for going off-topic. Yes, I am so awful!

Blame it on me. I'm the one that brought up Visual Phonics. It actually shows great promises because it addresses issues that CS fails to address and takes into account that knowing how a word is pronounced is not the key to literacy.

And I might add that unless one is involved with the students on a daily basis, and has continual contact with the parents of that child over an extended period of time, one does not know whether any system is being used consistenly within the family, nor whether it will continue to be used when a longitudinal perspective is taken. But put someone in a room that is trained to assess the consistency at home along with making inference regarding parental compliance based on many things other than a parent saying "I use it at home", a more complete and accurate picture is obtained. And consistency must be applied to using the system at all times in the child's presence, and not just when speaking directly to that child. Incidental exposure to language is impaired unless it is used every time a word is spoken in that child's presence whether it is direct communitcation with that child or not.

 

[loml]

about the experts? Ok...they are people who have worked in CS programs, (already gave u one person), students who came from CS programs and their parents, and research from my linguistics, language acquisition and literacy classes at Gallaudet University. Remmy, CS was invented at Gallaudet University so the research shown to us by the very same university where it was developed would hold some merit, wouldnt it?

shel90- Are you suggesting that because some "experts" from Gally(the same University that has an obvious bias to communication/language options & heirarchy), would look from a positive perspective on the system of Cued Speech? No offense intended, but that is very naive, imo.

I am well aware of where, when and who is/was involved with CS at Gally.

You have yet to answer my questions of why you believe that a person needs to know English, prior to using CS. Can you explain you position please.

Thanks.

 

[loml]

U have been lucky to be exposed to families who have been consistent with it. People who have worked in CS programs before told me that there has been some families who have been consistent with it and some who havent...just like with sign language. I believe them because it was their experience and I am not going to be the one who tells them they are wrong.

shel90 - I do not dispute what people have told you. Success in anything comes down to individuals having the correct foundation to build from and dedication to the goal. Simply because there are experiences that were not positive does not mean the cueing is not a successful tool for literacy/communication prior to having language base.

I have seen children struggling with aquiring English. I have seen how children "have" language but cannot hold a disccussion about what they have just read.

I do not believe in making literacy in English an overwhelming and daunting learning process.

 

[jillio]

shel90- Are you suggesting that because some "experts" from Gally(the same University that has an obvious bias to communication/language options & heirarchy), would look from a positive perspective on the system of Cued Speech? No offense intended, but that is very naive, imo.

I am well aware of where, when and who is/was involved with CS at Gally.

You have yet to answer my questions of why you believe that a person needs to know English, prior to using CS. Can you explain you position please.

Thanks.

Funny! Several times in the past you have claimed Gally as the birth place of CS, and referred to the fact that Cornett was a professor at Gally as support for CS, and the fact that it came from the deaf insitution and ASL users. Now, when someone else references that fact to show that support is not a prevalent at Gally as you have protrayed, you discount and negate the fact that it came from that insitution. You might want to keep in mind, as well, the Cornett was a math professor. Linguitics were outside his field of expertise. Perhaps that is the reason that CS failed.

Why a person needs to know English has been stated not just by Shel, but by numerous other posters on this forum that are of the same opinion. Constantly repeating the question is not going to change the answers. Just because you have not gotten the answers you want does not mean that the questions have not been answered.