Deaf teachers losing jobs because of English

Not sure if you saw it, so I'm gonna ask you again shel..
I'm curious, what is it that causes ASL to be a good tool to teach mathematics? My level of ASL isn't high enough up there yet, I just can't think up of a reason so far. Would like to see the direct perspective :wave:.
 
It could've been the religious sector who promoted oralism as well. Remember the "Hear the word and be saved"? They could easily see that the deaf person need to hear via CI in order to be saved.
I've never heard any Christians say that deaf people need a CI in order to be saved. All the deaf ministries, missionaries, and churches that I know emphasize using interpreters and/or deaf teachers and preachers. The early founders of deaf education in America were Christians who wanted to reach the deaf thru sign language, not oralism.

I don't see any connection.
 
Not sure if you saw it, so I'm gonna ask you again shel..
I'm curious, what is it that causes ASL to be a good tool to teach mathematics? My level of ASL isn't high enough up there yet, I just can't think up of a reason so far. Would like to see the direct perspective :wave:.

Sorry I missed it. I was using my pager and it is so easy for me to miss posts while using it. ASL is meant to be taken visually so there is a lot of use of space and linear shapes (I am not a mathematic so I dont speak math), same thing with math. I hope that makes sense.
 
I've never heard any Christians say that deaf people need a CI in order to be saved. All the deaf ministries, missionaries, and churches that I know emphasize using interpreters and/or deaf teachers and preachers. The early founders of deaf education in America were Christians who wanted to reach the deaf thru sign language, not oralism.

I don't see any connection.

Its not so much now, (maybe a few places but they are really idiotic -those kinds of 'backwards small towns fil of fanatics'. It is more a historical thing, say in late mid-18th to 19th century when religion actually were dominant in many aspects of their daily lives. If you read 'when the mind hears' you would observe this sort of references to salvation was quite big in the order of those days. It was more ideological as well.
By constrast, in the present times, references to religion is much less pronounced by its but it had not died off completely. You might see (or hear) some parents, relatives of 'that deaf child/person' having acquired 'excellent speech/or comprehension ability of speech' - some of whom would refer it back to as being a 'miracle' - that is a modern day version of a miracle by some divine intervention. It is more subtle these days, it just take a more rigorous analysis or skeptical mind to detect this.

Ideological references mutates over time, it is never static in the same way as the political-stance framework hasnt changed much (in principle) but it has changed vastly in terms of flavour, how it is discussed, how it is understood, how it relates to today's political climate. Same sort of thing occured to the link between deafness/disability and religion (and medicine) (heck some will actually say "thank God we have medicine!" but little do they realise it wasn't "God" it was simply advancement of our (or rather, those within medical professions) understandings which yeild these 'miracles'.
 
Sorry I missed it. I was using my pager and it is so easy for me to miss posts while using it. ASL is meant to be taken visually so there is a lot of use of space and linear shapes (I am not a mathematic so I dont speak math), same thing with math. I hope that makes sense.

Cool, thanks for the info. I am gonna dig into this cuz it is all news to me!
 
Sorry I missed it. I was using my pager and it is so easy for me to miss posts while using it. ASL is meant to be taken visually so there is a lot of use of space and linear shapes (I am not a mathematic so I dont speak math), same thing with math. I hope that makes sense.

when you look at at Naisho's input about maths and ASL, around there in this thread I, too made some comments regarding this too.
 
You know, Grum, when I think about it, look at all the little kids pre-algebra. They're using their fingers and hands to count for basic order of operations.. add/subtract/divide/multiply. I saw just about every one of them doing that while working for 4 years. Even I think I did it back when I was a kid and I still do when I take my heartrate without a stopwatch.

I think there's some psychological reasonings involved that go deeper into this. But once they hit that area of problem solving, logarithms, physics and all the fun stuff then yeah I would say that's most likely where it starts to differentiate..
 
Yeap, I agree with you Naisho, complex mathematical problems becomes more reliant upon comprehending difficult English words to actually operate on another level of abstration.

Moreso that even the problem compounds when English isnt taught properly to begin with, BUT when i say this now, I do not mean to say teach speech, I meant we should not limit teachings of English.
 
Its not so much now, (maybe a few places but they are really idiotic -those kinds of 'backwards small towns fil of fanatics'. It is more a historical thing, say in late mid-18th to 19th century when religion actually were dominant in many aspects of their daily lives. If you read 'when the mind hears' you would observe this sort of references to salvation was quite big in the order of those days. It was more ideological as well.
As you can see by the following, religiously based deaf schools that used sign language were established long before secular oral schools for the deaf.

A Turning Point in American History

The founding of the American School for the Deaf in Hartford, Conn., in 1817 was a crucial milestone in the way society related to people with disabilities. The time and place are significant because it was a unique conjunction of different currents which led to the school's establishment.

Many threads in developing U.S. society coalesced in Hartford in the early nineteenth century. The importance attached to universal literacy (by no means common in the world at the time) and the particular missionary religious doctrines of the prevalent Protestant sects provided both means and motive for the attempt to educate deaf people. The concept of self-reliance and the belief that religious salvation is possible through understanding the Bible determined the methods and purposes of the founders. Literacy, salvation and the skills needed to earn a living were the goals. Achieving these required clarity and fluidity of communication, which is why the school was based on sign language from the start.

History of Deaf Education in America

The first half century of the school's existence was a time of flowering and growth for deaf education in America. ASD served as a model institution and a training ground for numerous schools for the deaf which opened elsewhere during this period. Instruction was in sign language, with the goals of imparting literacy, training for productive labor, and religious salvation. ASD was a Congregationalist school in its early years, which was consistent with the civil government of Connecticut at the time the school was established.

An important feature of manual communication as a teaching language is that it allows deaf people to be teachers. Many alumni did go on to become teachers and principals at schools for the deaf throughout the United States, which spread sign language throughout the country. A deaf culture developed during this period, with periodicals, organizations, social relations and all the other features to be expected of a minority culture dispersed through the general population. So rapid and positive was the spread of this language and culture that the period is today referred to as a golden age.

The culminating achievement of that time was the establishment of the Columbia Institute for the Deaf at Washington, D.C. in 1864. Now called Gallaudet University, it is still the only liberal arts college for the deaf in the world, although there are now many other institutions offering college and post graduate degrees to the deaf.

The later half of the nineteenth century witnessed the rise of oral theories of deaf education. Although there are a variety of these theories, they have in common an emphasis on the importance of oral skills (speech-reading and speech) in the education of deaf children. A leading proponent of oral methods was Alexander Graham Bell, whose mother and wife were both hard of hearing. The first major oral school in the U.S., Clarke School for the Deaf in Northampton, Massachusetts, opened in 1867.
ASD History
History of Deaf Education in America
 
I've never heard any Christians say that deaf people need a CI in order to be saved. All the deaf ministries, missionaries, and churches that I know emphasize using interpreters and/or deaf teachers and preachers. The early founders of deaf education in America were Christians who wanted to reach the deaf thru sign language, not oralism.

I don't see any connection.

You also have to consider the context of time. Back when the Deaf were being educated by monks, pastors, abbots, priests and fairs, the wealthy nobles sent anyone that was considered as not worthy to religious orders. You see, heirs get to stayed behind and inherit their parents' fortunate and titles, while the less desirables such as mentally ill, deaf, blind, women and so on were sent to religious institutes to become nuns and monks. That was the social reality before the 1800s. So, the foundation for Deaf education was laid out and became the stepping stones to the Deaf education we came to embrace. They didn't have access to the technology or information we had back then.

However now we have access to technology, so there are certain religious circles that advocate usages of hearing aids and cochlear implants to make kids hear the sermons and words. Just because it doesn't happen with your religious circle, doesn't means other Christian leaderships are not enforcing it as well. I think we are forgetting that there are 2 billion Christians worldwide, and they can't all be following the same ideology that was established between 1500s-1800s.
 
You also have to consider the context of time. Back when the Deaf were being educated by monks, pastors, abbots, priests and fairs, the wealthy nobles sent anyone that was considered as not worthy to religious orders. You see, heirs get to stayed behind and inherit their parents' fortunate and titles, while the less desirables such as mentally ill, deaf, blind, women and so on were sent to religious institutes to become nuns and monks.
I'm familiar with the custom of primogeniture in Europe. The eldest son inherited all the land and wealth. The younger sons usually joined the military or the clergy. Daughters sought husbands or became nuns. It didn't have to do with being "less desirable." It had to do with birth order and sex.

Mentally ill, blind, deaf, and otherwise "handicapped" people were usually hidden away, left to die, or sent away.


...However now we have access to technology, so there are certain religious circles that advocate usages of hearing aids and cochlear implants to make kids hear the sermons and words. Just because it doesn't happen with your religious circle, doesn't means other Christian leaderships are not enforcing it as well. I think we are forgetting that there are 2 billion Christians worldwide, and they can't all be following the same ideology that was established between 1500s-1800s.
My "religious circle" encircles the globe (geographically) but is theologically limited to born again Christians of various denominations. None of their ministries require deaf people to use HAs, CIs, or oral communication. Christian deaf ministries usually have the philosophy of dealing with people as they are. If the deaf person uses ASL, we use ASL. If the deaf person uses SEE or PSE, we use SEE or PSE. If the deaf person has a CI or HA and prefers oral communication, we use oral communication. It's not up to the hearing ministry worker to decide the mode of communication. The ministry worker is supposed to adapt to the communication needs and preferences of the deaf person.

We're getting far off topic. If you want to continue this topic I suggest starting a new thread.

The off-topic suggestion that "religious" people support oralism and "scientific" people support ASL has taken us down this rabbit trail.
 
My "religious circle" encircles the globe (geographically) but is theologically limited to born again Christians of various denominations. None of their ministries require deaf people to use HAs, CIs, or oral communication. Christian deaf ministries usually have the philosophy of dealing with people as they are. If the deaf person uses ASL, we use ASL. If the deaf person uses SEE or PSE, we use SEE or PSE. If the deaf person has a CI or HA and prefers oral communication, we use oral communication. It's not up to the hearing ministry worker to decide the mode of communication. The ministry worker is supposed to adapt to the communication needs and preferences of the deaf person.

No worries. It just that I had some experiences with a few branches of Christianity. Like there was a Mormon church in one city that wanted all of its Deaf people to have hearing aids and CI and advocated for oralism only, while a Jehovah's Witness minister accepted only ASL and outcasted people that used other systems, and then there is a Mennonite branch, that my grandmother came from, usually hide deaf people behind closed doors. (Edit: But I digress since a Mormon church, that one of my previous girlfriends belonged to embraced everyone, and a Witness I know also embraced everyone as well.) So it is all relevant to ideology, and who is the authority in the local areas. So I get kinda irked out when people overgeneralise.

Anyway, I agree, we should start a new thread is going to be about social Darwinism versus religion. This thread went way off-topic talking about how Deaf people should be educated, instead of focusing on the matters at hand: why are these teachers failing the exams?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Going to try and bring it back on topic.

Now, is there any way we can get the exam-makers to remove aural-based questions? It is really unfair for anyone to be expected to know this kind of thing. Some hearing people are not exposed to all the phonics out there. Formal written English is standardized, phonics are not.

Knowing written English is not discriminatory, however being expected to know aural components of English is just unfair. I am reserved here because I am not sure if this was brought to the exam-maker's attention about the problems that this component is causing or they are just ignoring these inquires.
 
on the surface, social Darwinism versus religion seems to be diverted from this thread, but it is not that far off when we can percieve the link between how Deaf people should be educated. This includes what kind of focus on the matters at hand, especially exams and credential, but ultimately looking at why hearing people still thinks oralism is superior as does why "successful deafs" are never really full signers. Even that Marlee Marlin isnt really total ASLers, she has a quality of an oralist (or think hearie) as well - that Hearing people relates to. sic
 
Anyway, I agree, we should start a new thread is going to be about social Darwinism versus religion. This thread went way off-topic talking about how Deaf people should be educated, instead of focusing on the matters at hand: why are these teachers failing the exams?

I think how the Deaf people was educated and why Deaf teachers are failing the exams are related. If the Deaf people get the true Bi-Bi education, it is possible that more Deaf teachers would be able to pass their exams once the phonics part is removed.
 
Is there really a shortage of deaf teachers with sufficent english skills to make the deaf education go around? I definitely doubt so. Doing this kind of certification without testing the bilingual skills of the teacher is a way of putting the english spoken way of thinking into deaf education to me. Running single tests like this reveals incompetence about the challenges of bi-bi education.

A much more effective way to raise the level of deaf education, oral or bi-bi, would be to check communication with students. I am sure we would get a much bigger shortage with numbers of teachers failing communication certfications at a grand scale.
 
Not sure if you saw it, so I'm gonna ask you again shel..
I'm curious, what is it that causes ASL to be a good tool to teach mathematics? My level of ASL isn't high enough up there yet, I just can't think up of a reason so far. Would like to see the direct perspective :wave:.

I don't know if this statement would make things more clear: "Now, because ASL is a spatial language, it can communicate arrangement and relative distance of things and people in quite a different way than English or, indeed, any oral language." -The Mask of Benevolence by Harlan Lane (paperback) - page 124

I just love the example in that book where Harlan had two hearing people do this project and then two Deaf people do this same project. The project is one is to read the layout of the doll house on the box to the friend and the friend had to rely on the directions on where to put the furniture in the doll house. The Deaf people did this differently and much quicker. (page 123 to 125 of the same book)


Another quote that I like:
page 71 of Seeing Voices by Oliver Sacks where Oliver Sacks was quoting Stokoe: "Speech has only one dimension - its extension in time; writing has two dimensions; models have three, but only signed languages have at their disposal four dimensions - the three spatial dimensions accessible to a signer's body, as well as the dimension of time. And Sign fully exploits the syntactic possibliities in its four-dimensional channel of expression."
 
That is an interesting way of explaining it, Buffalo. I think I do realize what it means now, due to the terminology of spatial interactions making sense.

I wonder, if the hearing were to implement or develop english so that it consists of speaking and signing at the same time, would it give it even more of an extra dimension? I'm not talking about, for example how interpreters may speak and signing at the same time, but more like a whole new english language developed in light of this.
 
That is an interesting way of explaining it, Buffalo. I think I do realize what it means now, due to the terminology of spatial interactions making sense.

I wonder, if the hearing were to implement or develop english so that it consists of speaking and signing at the same time, would it give it even more of an extra dimension? I'm not talking about, for example how interpreters may speak and signing at the same time, but more like a whole new english language developed in light of this.

I don't know if that is possible. One might have to invent new words to make this workable.
 
That is an interesting way of explaining it, Buffalo. I think I do realize what it means now, due to the terminology of spatial interactions making sense.

I wonder, if the hearing were to implement or develop english so that it consists of speaking and signing at the same time, would it give it even more of an extra dimension? I'm not talking about, for example how interpreters may speak and signing at the same time, but more like a whole new english language developed in light of this.

One cant take a language and change it. It wont work...hearing people have been trying to do that with ASL unsuccessfully and I doubt it would work with English as well.
 
Maybe they are doing it like the wrong way or something, through all the unsuccessful attempts. I guess since ASL is considered a minority language by the mainstream, there's less interest in using signing patterns and facial expressions for communication.

It would be pretty cool if there was some person who came out from the ASL world, is of Oral and sign background, created some form of bridge between ASL with speech habits that even the deaf would be able to partially if not fully communicate.

I guess, that would be really utopian to wish for.
 
Back
Top