Why do you insist on clouding the isuses? Your grammar is not the topic here, nor is shel's. You are equating agreeing with as jumpting to the defense of. What you may need to keep in mind is it is not your grammar that people disagree with,
But that is what Tousi said that my grammar was not at the level that he expected for an educator. it is not your identity as a parent, it is not your identity as a teacher--although I do agree that an oral teacher of the deaf should be setting a much more reliable expample of the proper use of the English language thatn I have seen from you--
it is the philosophy to which you subscribe that seeks to keep deaf/Deaf individuals defined as disabled by the very practice they claim will liberate. It is the discrimination and injustice--quite often covert--that continues in the face of oralism. This subject goes much further than your daughter, or your son, or any of your preschool students. And your refusal to see that we are talking about a population, not simply your small world and family, indicates that eventhough you claim to have achieved a Masters level in education, you obviously did not acquire the ability to think critically and logically,m nor to synthesize informaiton from an objective position along the way.
Judging from some of the claims you have made, the age of the children you work with, and the locations where you say you received "training" (i.e. student teaching experience?)., I would venture the guess that you have a degree in early childhood education
[COLOR="blue" No I do not have an early education degree, although I do have a lot of training in that area. My first credential is birth through 22 years old and my second credential is k thorugh 12.[/COLOR]
that extends to teaching privilegesfrom presechool to 2nd grade. I see nothing in your posts that gives evidence of any special expertise in special education methodology,
[COLOR="blue"]You have never seen me actually teaching or in any other capacity except posting my views and beliefs. I don't understand how you assume what I can can do or what knowledge I have. I think it is kind of narrow minded of you to be able to say something like that. [/COLOR]
and no evidence of expertise in deaf education past the limited oral methods that you so tenaciously cling to. When a studnet studies deaf education, they have the opportunity to learn all of the methodologies, and are exposed to research regarding the effectiveness of various methods.
But I was expose to different methods and I choose what work for my children and then went on to get my education in that method. If you don't believe me it doesn't really matter to me. You and people with your views have no real impact in my life, in my children's lives, or in my career. It is OK with me that you feel that way. If it makes you feel better go ahead think what you want. I do not see evidence that you have been exposed to any of the knowledge that shel has obtained in the pursuit of her degrees. Yet you claim to have received the same education as shel. I seriously doubt that this even approximates the truth of the situation.
I do not claim to have received same education. I claim to have the same amount of education.
The claim that you were doing your own little experiment is an absurdity. I doubt seriously that you are familiar enough with experimental procedures to even have a grasp of design.
You do not know me well wnough to know what I know and what I do not know.
I find it odd that you came up with this assertion only when you perceived the need to defend yourself. That is tatamount to a child, when caught in a mistake, saying, "I meant to do that!" It lacks credibility and has further damaged your ability to persuade.
Please do not resort to name calling. That is the same tactic used by people the world over when they have run out of logical and convincing argument and are not open minded enough to be able to concede that perhaps they were simply ill informed and forming opinion based on less than adequate information.