Deaf Cuer Profiles: Life with Cochlear Implants

Sad, but true ^^^ If even then.
 
souggy said:
Seconded... by the time I got to grade 6, i thought everyone could read Victorian novels and Shakespeare... only to find that most students don't have a grasp on them until their Master's degree.
Click to expand...

I know! It came as a surprise to me because during my years at VSDB and MSSD, I assumed all hearing could read better than deaf.
 
Last edited:
ou have to understand that in order to provide the deaf the phonological model of English, you have to provide a VISUAL counterpart of sounds.
Click to expand...
So it's basicly a hand signal version of omnioopenia.
It's a very good tool, and I do think it would be well served to use in English classes for the dhh.....but as a primary tool, it isn't very good.
 
I can see why it looks in theory like a good teaching tool, but I am rather unable to see how it works in practice as a teaching tool. To learn the phoneme-grapheme relationship in synthetic phonics it's a symbol-sound relationship. To learn the symbol-cue relationship visually represents the word, but if you aren't able to put that visual together into a concept how does it help? Have you moved forward in any way to be able to change the on-paper visual of, say, cat from /c/a/t/ into an in-the-air visual of /c/a/t/ ? It's the process of flow, of blending, that changes /c/a/t/ into cat into a concept of a 4-legged furry animal with whiskers. You are just changing visual to alternative visual. It's the nature of sound that enables someone to go "ca/t" and keep saying it till they can work out what is familiar about the sound and work out that it's actually cat.

I can see it as a very useful tool for disambiguation for someone who understands some elements of speech, or as a means to demonstrate to someone who is interested in figuring out how a word sounds, but I am not sure I can see how it's helpful in literacy. Possibly in encoding a word onto paper, if you learn that this handshape is a "sh" on paper and that handshape is a "t" on paper, but essentially I am not getting it. I am still interested in it as a communication strategy for me, but I think it seems more of a hearing person's idea of what a deaf person might need. Or more accurately, a tool that a team of hearing professionals hope they can use in mainstreaming because they are stuck for other ways to teach deaf children to read because they'd have to change their whole approach rather than just move from a sound to a signal.
 
RoseRodent said:
I can see why it looks in theory like a good teaching tool, but I am rather unable to see how it works in practice as a teaching tool. To learn the phoneme-grapheme relationship in synthetic phonics it's a symbol-sound relationship. To learn the symbol-cue relationship visually represents the word, but if you aren't able to put that visual together into a concept how does it help? Have you moved forward in any way to be able to change the on-paper visual of, say, cat from /c/a/t/ into an in-the-air visual of /c/a/t/ ? It's the process of flow, of blending, that changes /c/a/t/ into cat into a concept of a 4-legged furry animal with whiskers. You are just changing visual to alternative visual. It's the nature of sound that enables someone to go "ca/t" and keep saying it till they can work out what is familiar about the sound and work out that it's actually cat.

I can see it as a very useful tool for disambiguation for someone who understands some elements of speech, or as a means to demonstrate to someone who is interested in figuring out how a word sounds, but I am not sure I can see how it's helpful in literacy. Possibly in encoding a word onto paper, if you learn that this handshape is a "sh" on paper and that handshape is a "t" on paper, but essentially I am not getting it. I am still interested in it as a communication strategy for me, but I think it seems more of a hearing person's idea of what a deaf person might need. Or more accurately, a tool that a team of hearing professionals hope they can use in mainstreaming because they are stuck for other ways to teach deaf children to read because they'd have to change their whole approach rather than just move from a sound to a signal.
Click to expand...

RoseRodent - Cued Speech is not a speech tool, although it marries well with a speech program. Cueing is visual sound. It is used simultaneously with the mouth shapes of speech/spoken English. There are three distinct mouth shapes in spoken English (round, flat and oval). The hand shapes for the consonant sound are grouped such that the mouth shape does not repeat. The same logic is applied to the hand placements (mouth shapes) for the vowel phonemes.

When a deaf/hoh child is consistently provided access visually to the sounds of speech , they learn to "read" the combination of the mouth shape and the hand shape, which in turn provides them with an internal "voice" for the stream of visual sound that they are receiving. When a child understands the sounds of the language, then they can transfer this skill to the grapheme/phoneme reading and writing.

How do you in-vision this system as a communication strategy for you?
 
souggy said:
Seconded... by the time I got to grade 6, i thought everyone could read Victorian novels and Shakespeare... only to find that most students don't have a grasp on them until their Master's degree.
Click to expand...

Well aren't you just a smarty smarty pants. :D

I didn't read Shakespeare until middle school, but I definitely didn't really understand him until I got to college, and I was always about 3-4 grade levels above my peers in reading.
 
loml said:
RoseRodent - Cued Speech is not a speech tool,
Click to expand...

Not sure where I said it was, I said I can see why it looks like a good teaching tool for teaching phoneme-grapheme relationships. I can't see where the idea that I said it was a speech tool comes in at all!

loml said:
When a deaf/hoh child is consistently provided access visually to the sounds of speech , they learn to "read" the combination of the mouth shape and the hand shape, which in turn provides them with an internal "voice" for the stream of visual sound
Click to expand...

This is the bit that I don't see, I don't see how it provides an internal voice per se, just an internal appreciation of visual symbols. I know from aural representation that the s-h combination goes "sh" but I'm not sure how it becomes helpful to change it from a swirly shape and a tall shape with a curve on it on the paper to a handshape in the air.
 
RoseRodent said:
I can see why it looks in theory like a good teaching tool, but I am rather unable to see how it works in practice as a teaching tool. To learn the phoneme-grapheme relationship in synthetic phonics it's a symbol-sound relationship. To learn the symbol-cue relationship visually represents the word, but if you aren't able to put that visual together into a concept how does it help? Have you moved forward in any way to be able to change the on-paper visual of, say, cat from /c/a/t/ into an in-the-air visual of /c/a/t/ ? It's the process of flow, of blending, that changes /c/a/t/ into cat into a concept of a 4-legged furry animal with whiskers. You are just changing visual to alternative visual. It's the nature of sound that enables someone to go "ca/t" and keep saying it till they can work out what is familiar about the sound and work out that it's actually cat.

I can see it as a very useful tool for disambiguation for someone who understands some elements of speech, or as a means to demonstrate to someone who is interested in figuring out how a word sounds, but I am not sure I can see how it's helpful in literacy. Possibly in encoding a word onto paper, if you learn that this handshape is a "sh" on paper and that handshape is a "t" on paper, but essentially I am not getting it. I am still interested in it as a communication strategy for me, but I think it seems more of a hearing person's idea of what a deaf person might need. Or more accurately, a tool that a team of hearing professionals hope they can use in mainstreaming because they are stuck for other ways to teach deaf children to read because they'd have to change their whole approach rather than just move from a sound to a signal.
Click to expand...

I think you are on the track what cued speech is about, and you aren't the first person that have questioned this. Cued speech systems have been around since the first deaf person learned to read. Even the spanish monks in the 15th century knew of cued speech techniques. The american fingerspelling system orginated from cued speech systems.

NCSA is trying to advertise it as a modern and revolutionary invention, based on hard science, but one have to lack knowledge of history and literacy to believe them. The truth is that it's donald duck science to claim that cued speech really is all deaf people need. It's very telling that NCSA is the only organization in the states that openly claim that "depedency" on ASL can be unhealty with literacy in mind.
 
loml said:
When a deaf/hoh child is consistently provided access visually to the sounds of speech , they learn to "read" the combination of the mouth shape and the hand shape, which in turn provides them with an internal "voice" for the stream of visual sound that they are receiving. When a child understands the sounds of the language, then they can transfer this skill to the grapheme/phoneme reading and writing.
Click to expand...

This is a simplified theory of how a child learn to read. To more than a deaf person, this is an effective torture recipe.
 
flip said:
I think you are on the track what cued speech is about, and you aren't the first person that have questioned this. Cued speech systems have been around since the first deaf person learned to read. Even the spanish monks in the 15th century knew of cued speech techniques. The american fingerspelling system orginated from cued speech systems.

NCSA is trying to advertise it as a modern and revolutionary invention, based on hard science, but one have to lack knowledge of history and literacy to believe them. The truth is that it's donald duck science to claim that cued speech really is all deaf people need. It's very telling that NCSA is the only organization in the states that openly claim that "depedency" on ASL can be unhealty with literacy in mind.
Click to expand...

:mad:
 
Back
Top