Deaf Education research......

Status
Not open for further replies.
faire_jour said:
I said that responsible oral parents work hard, there are parents who do nothing. I never denied that. As for whether or not parents learn ASL, that is just a fact, 90% will never get past preschool level.
Click to expand...

They have to work hard to get pass that 90%

I dont know why you say oral method is "harder"
 
deafgal001 said:
They have to work hard to get pass that 90%

I dont know why you say oral method is "harder"
Click to expand...

Because I have done both. There is a ton of knowledge. That is why a teacher of the deaf is different from a mainstream teacher. What do you think they do for those extra years in school?
 
faire_jour said:
Because I have done both. There is a ton of knowledge. That is why a teacher of the deaf is different from a mainstream teacher. What do you think they do for those extra years in school?
Click to expand...

ok, Since you say ASL is easy then I expect parents to go beyond preschool level.
 
deafgal001 said:
ok, Since you say ASL is easy then I expect parents to go beyond preschool level.
Click to expand...

I think it is irresponsible for a parent to choose ASL for their child and NOT become fluent. It is completely ridiculous.
 
Have there ever been cases where a parents choose Oral method, and their child picked up ASL anyway and prefer to use it, and want their parents to learn it? (I know it was common in the past) . Are these parents lazy when they don't want to use it because it wasn't something they chosen for their child in the first place?
 
Beowulf said:
Nawww, just give him rope. Plenty of it. What a jerk.
Click to expand...


Let's see now I'm a jerk and before that a scumbag. As for the rope is that the same rope as you have yourself tangled in with such articulate and reasoned responses?
 
rick48 said:
Let's see now I'm a jerk and before that a scumbag. As for the rope is that the same rope as you have yourself tangled in with such articulate and reasoned responses?
Click to expand...

Feel better? I do. :)
 
It's okay. I gave my child all options. As a consequence, he can communicate in English verbally and in writing, and in ASL. He is bilingual. I personally see that as more of an advantage than simply amplifying sound and being restricted to oral only.

BTW, I see a lot of projecting of one's own insecurities regarding parenting going on there
Click to expand...
. Right on jillo!!!! rick48 bear in mind that jillo's son is BILINGAL! We're not saying "oh let's just restrict dhh kids to ASL only." jillo's son can hear and speak and interact with hearing people....BUT he's not dependent on his hearing aid. He can function both with and without his hearing aid!" (or CI if he had one) I have to say I think you feel guilty b/c you bought into the "freedom in listening and talking" propaganda that AG Bell pushed. You did not have to do oral only. You could have done speech AND sign. If Sign advocates promoted their methodology as " your kid can be BILINGAL!" you'd see membership in AG Bell shrink.
Just because I did not choose it does not mean that I do not know what it entails. In fact, because I do know what it entails is exactly the reason I stayed away from it. I saw exactly how damaging it can be to a child. The premises it operates from are emotionally and cognitively damaging.
Click to expand...
Exactly! There are some dhh kids who grew up with minimal issues from being oral only and mainstreamed to the max...but a lot more had major issues with it. Oralism is based on the assumption that hoh kids are more hearing then deaf. There are some kids like that yes, but overall oral only is "oh stuff like ASL and deaf culture and cued speech is "limiting" or a "crutch" :roll:
Right. And we should focus on seeing for blind kids, and walking for kids with severe spinal injuries.
Click to expand...
EXACTLY!!!! Were you aware that Braille and other blind interventions aren't very popular in blind ed?
 
deafdyke said:
. Right on jillo!!!! rick48 bear in mind that jillo's son is BILINGAL! We're not saying "oh let's just restrict dhh kids to ASL only." jillo's son can hear and speak and interact with hearing people....BUT he's not dependent on his hearing aid. He can function both with and without his hearing aid!" (or CI if he had one) I have to say I think you feel guilty b/c you bought into the "freedom in listening and talking" propaganda that AG Bell pushed. You did not have to do oral only. You could have done speech AND sign. If Sign advocates promoted their methodology as " your kid can be BILINGAL!" you'd see membership in AG Bell shrink.
Exactly! There are some dhh kids who grew up with minimal issues from being oral only and mainstreamed to the max...but a lot more had major issues with it. Oralism is based on the assumption that hoh kids are more hearing then deaf. There are some kids like that yes, but overall oral only is "oh stuff like ASL and deaf culture and cued speech is "limiting" or a "crutch" :roll:
EXACTLY!!!! Were you aware that Braille and other blind interventions aren't very popular in blind ed?
Click to expand...

How do you know the bolded part?

Also, I don't think Rick feels guilty, why would he? He says his child is doing awesome, so why would he want to change his choices?

And why DON'T ASL advocates praise ASL and bilingualism INSTEAD of telling oral parents that their children are damaged and CIs don't work and that their child will end up miserable and without language? If they focused on the POSITIVES of ASL rather than trying to scare parents with lies (that parents clearly don't believe because they see with their own eyes that CIs work and that their child is developing language) maybe they could see a change.
 
faire_jour said:
How do you know the bolded part?

Also, I don't think Rick feels guilty, why would he? He says his child is doing awesome, so why would he want to change his choices?

And why DON'T ASL advocates praise ASL and bilingualism INSTEAD of telling oral parents that their children are damaged and CIs don't work and that their child will end up miserable and without language? If they focused on the POSITIVES of ASL rather than trying to scare parents with lies (that parents clearly don't believe because they see with their own eyes that CIs work and that their child is developing language) maybe they could see a change.
Click to expand...

Because she has said so. Many times.
 
I cant believe some of the remarks here.

WE ARE ADVOCATING FOR BOTH!!! How much CLEARER can it GET??????????????
 
shel90 said:
I cant believe some of the idiots here.

WE ARE ADVOCATING FOR BOTH!!! How much CLEARER can it GET??????????????
Click to expand...

I know. I cannot think of a time that we said it MUST BE ASL ONLY or MUST BE ORAL ONLY.
 
AlleyCat said:
I know. I cannot think of a time that we said it MUST BE ASL ONLY or MUST BE ORAL ONLY.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of people who believe that ASL should be the language of education and of communication. They believe it should be used, from birth, as the primary language. Then, later, a child can have some speech therapy. BUT, it isn't to be done in pull out, and you can't do listening alone, without signing, because that is cruel. Also, being oral only is NEVER ok.......so, how do you possibly teach spoken language? How is a child going to learn the language without being exposed to it???
 
faire_jour said:
There are plenty of people who believe that ASL should be the language of education and of communication. They believe it should be used, from birth, as the primary language. Then, later, a child can have some speech therapy. BUT, it isn't to be done in pull out, and you can't do listening alone, without signing, because that is cruel. Also, being oral only is NEVER ok.......so, how do you possibly teach spoken language? How is a child going to learn the language without being exposed to it???
Click to expand...

Well .. we've talked about the pull-outs in the terms of the stigma it puts on us, the bullying and whatnot.

As far as the with, or without signing, or teaching spoken language, or not, or exposure, it's what I, among many others here have tried to share with you, and we get shot down every time.

So I'm not going to bother answering that question any further. No sense beating a dead horse.
 
AlleyCat said:
Well .. we've talked about the pull-outs in the terms of the stigma it puts on us, the bullying and whatnot.

As far as the with, or without signing, or teaching spoken language, or not, or exposure, it's what I, among many others here have tried to share with you, and we get shot down every time.

So I'm not going to bother answering that question any further. No sense beating a dead horse.
Click to expand...

You aren't going to say it because you don't have an answer. It is impossible to have two primary languages. It is impossible to immerse a child in two languages at the same time. One language is going to have to be stressed at a time, and those advocates believe it should always be ASL.

Also, there is a discussion in another thread at this moment saying that it is not a problem for a child to miss out on years and years of language learning and have huge language delays..............:shock:
 
faire_jour said:
You aren't going to say it because you don't have an answer. It is impossible to have two primary languages. It is impossible to immerse a child in two languages at the same time. One language is going to have to be stressed at a time, and those advocates believe it should always be ASL.

Also, there is a discussion in another thread at this moment saying that it is not a problem for a child to miss out on years and years of language learning and have huge language delays..............:shock:
Click to expand...

Erk ... I learned ASL and speech simultaneously. What that means: two primary languages AT THE SAME TIME. You've asked us not to pretend to know what's going on with Miss Kat. Guess what? The same applies to you. You don't get to pretend to know what I experienced when I was 2.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top