Deaf children and hearing parents...why don't the parents learn sl?

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillio said:
Nor does it enlighten us as to why hearing parents of deaf children refuse to learn sign language.
Click to expand...

It wasn't intended to enlighten you as to why jillio.
 
The question is why are many parents of deaf children resistant to learn ASL?
 
loml said:
It wasn't intended to enlighten you as to why jillio.
Click to expand...

Then why post it here? If it isn't intended to address the question posed in the OP, it is decidedly off topic.
 
jillio said:
How so? It is indicative of your numerous other posts regarding CS. Are we to assume that they were all humorous as well? I fail to see the humor in purposely posting innacurracies.
Click to expand...

jillio - I can certainly walk your through the original post to owen06 if you really need that. That was were the humour was. Sorry that you missed it.

Inaccuracies according to who?
 
loml said:
jillio - I can certainly walk your through the original post to owen06 if you really need that. That was were the humour was. Sorry that you missed it.

Inaccuracies according to who?
Click to expand...

Inaccuracies according to whomever is involved directly with deaf ed and also to whomever is knowledgable regarding linguistic issues.

I didn't miss the humor. It simply isn't present.

Can we get back on topic now?
 
jillio said:
Inaccuracies according to whomever is involved directly with deaf ed and also to whomever is knowledgable regarding linguistic issues.
Click to expand...

jillio - that would be???? These supposed inaccurracies are exactly what ?
 
shel90 said:
Is it due to organizations like AGBell that continue to stigmatize ASL?
Click to expand...

That's part of it, I'm sure. Also, in looking for assistance with decisions regarding a deaf child, A.G. Bell is a name that hearing parents all remember from history lessons, and so that recognition would lead them to assume that an organization that bears his name is ethical. They will turn to that which is familiar. Just like in a grocery store...we are more inclined to purchase a brand whose name is familiar to us. A.G. Bell counts on that happening, I'm sure. It keeps their membership roster increasing and supports the fact that they will be in first line contact with many hearing parents of newly diagnosed children. Problem is, the history taught about A.G. Bell is hardly accurate. If more hearing parents knew the actual attitudes of A.G. Bell, they would think twice about subjecting their children to such flawed theories.
 
jillio said:
Correlative research, nor research of any design, proves nothing. It only supports a hypothesis. Your insistence on research as proof is indicative of your lack of understanding of the purpose of research. This is one if the first things a student learns of research.

The only research design that can imply causation is a design of the scientific method. Any researcher or intorductory test will plainly state that correlational research does not have the capability to support causation. Correlation simply supports the hypohtesis that two separate events occur in a postive or a negative relationship.

A.K.A. see the graph, the second link I posted. See the line? That's a positive correlation coefficient. Does that support the hypothesis presented? Sure it does. Is it still absolutely rediculous?

Additionally, the text you have posted contains many false assumptions.
Click to expand...

Wow. Clearly, my point was missed by you but I will try again. I posted an article with numerous false assumptions as a satire, a.k.a., it was a JOKE! It illustrated my point precisely, which was that causation cannot necessarily be drawn from correlation. And I just wanted to show flip and all the other readers out there that sometimes people will assume that it can, and unless you read articles and think carefully about what they say, you might be *tricked*. By picking an article so blatantly rediculous... everyone knows that there is no legitimate link between a decrease in the number of pirates and an increase in global temperature; even if the remaining pirates spent their entire lifetimes eating the candy they originally were to supply to little children, thus developing a preponderous amount of flatus (methane from cattle has occasionally be examined as a contributing factor to global warming).

I have been involved in numerous research projects, ranging in subjects such as literature, biochemistry, genetics, cancer, medicine, and psychology. I insist on research as support for arguments - not proof. I absolutely love to learn. However, if the subject turns to things that are currently under research, or have been researched, and people wish to announce they once read research but can't find it or will have to post it later in order to support their statements, I expect to see that research. I just don't want broad statements that have no evidence to them. I don't need proof. I want evidence to support said statements and I want to be able to read that evidence. Furthermore, I want to be able to criticize that evidence and ask questions to further my, and in corollary everyone else's, learning.
 
loml said:
jillio - that would be???? These supposed inaccurracies are exactly what ?
Click to expand...

As your post is off topic and contributes nothing to the discussion regarding the OP, I will politely refrain from continuing the efforts to diffuse the topic. The text you have posted speaks for itself. However, if you would like to start another thread regarding the matter, I will be more than happy to respond.
 
owen06 said:
Wow. Clearly, my point was missed by you but I will try again. I posted an article with numerous false assumptions as a satire, a.k.a., it was a JOKE! It illustrated my point precisely, which was that causation cannot necessarily be drawn from correlation. And I just wanted to show flip and all the other readers out there that sometimes people will assume that it can, and unless you read articles and think carefully about what they say, you might be *tricked*. By picking an article so blatantly rediculous... everyone knows that there is no legitimate link between a decrease in the number of pirates and an increase in global temperature; even if the remaining pirates spent their entire lifetimes eating the candy they originally were to supply to little children, thus developing a preponderous amount of flatus (methane from cattle has occasionally be examined as a contributing factor to global warming).

I have been involved in numerous research projects, ranging in subjects such as literature, biochemistry, genetics, cancer, medicine, and psychology. I insist on research as support for arguments - not proof. I absolutely love to learn. However, if the subject turns to things that are currently under research, or have been researched, and people wish to announce they once read research but can't find it or will have to post it later in order to support their statements, I expect to see that research. I just don't want broad statements that have no evidence to them. I don't need proof. I want evidence to support said statements and I want to be able to read that evidence. Furthermore, I want to be able to criticize that evidence and ask questions to further my, and in corollary everyone else's, learning.
Click to expand...

Where are you affiliated? Your posts read more like an undergraduate just beginning to delve into the topic of research.
 
I am affiliated with the process of understanding. Do you need a CV? However, this is not an appropriate diversion of the topic. Instead of holding legitimate debate, or conversation even; it appears that you need to belittle. And this is a trend. I think I should graph it for you so you can see the positive slope. Y=mx+b.

I don't know why its so hard to see that I really care about this subject however I approach it in a logical step-by-step manner. I know about the scientific method. I am not starting out my scientific career. I am no expert, because I know there is so much more to learn - about a great many things.
 
jillio said:
That's part of it, I'm sure. Also, in looking for assistance with decisions regarding a deaf child, A.G. Bell is a name that hearing parents all remember from history lessons, and so that recognition would lead them to assume that an organization that bears his name is ethical. They will turn to that which is familiar. Just like in a grocery store...we are more inclined to purchase a brand whose name is familiar to us. A.G. Bell counts on that happening, I'm sure. It keeps their membership roster increasing and supports the fact that they will be in first line contact with many hearing parents of newly diagnosed children. Problem is, the history taught about A.G. Bell is hardly accurate. If more hearing parents knew the actual attitudes of A.G. Bell, they would think twice about subjecting their children to such flawed theories.
Click to expand...


Also, I think in today's society is about perfection so deafness doesnt fit in many people's idea of perfection whatever that is. :roll:
 
jillio said:
As your post is off topic and contributes nothing to the discussion regarding the OP, I will politely refrain from continuing the efforts to diffuse the topic. The text you have posted speaks for itself. However, if you would like to start another thread regarding the matter, I will be more than happy to respond.
Click to expand...


THANK U!!!! This is about WHY parents dont learn SL not about other approaches.
 
shel90 said:
Also, I think in today's society is about perfection so deafness doesnt fit in many people's idea of perfection whatever that is. :roll:
Click to expand...

Yep. It goes right back to the medical model and the assumption that the majority is the standard used to decide normalcy.
 
jillio said:
Yep. It goes right back to the medical model and the assumption that the majority is the standard used to decide normalcy.
Click to expand...

This really sucks...cuz I feel the most "normal" in a signing environment as opposed to an oral only environment. It is just too bad that these parents cant see that.
 
orlygx7.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top