Do we have a challenge ahead of us to avoid becoming Hearing?

StSapphire said:
Rolling seems to be explicitly claiming that it was a choice, and that they chose to be illiterate.
Click to expand...

I don't really need to discuss that. My statement stands on its own.

It was not a choice.
 
StSapphire said:
...
The reason it comes off that way is because people were talking about different methods of teaching language acquisition (oralism and ASL), which has nothing to do with reading and writing. If your point is just about people choosing (yeah, right... :roll:) to be illiterate or not, then bringing that up in the middle of a conversation about language acquisition certainly makes it seem as though you think that certain methods of language acquisition directly affect literacy, which is not the case.
Click to expand...

You don't think that methods of language acquisition directly impact literacy? I've read many studies to the contrary.
 
StSapphire said:
Haha, is it really that hard to believe? Growing up, my parents never paid for cable, so the only thing in the house we had was broadcast TV, so I didn't really watch TV that much. I'd prefer to read books.

So for the past... 5 years or so, no, I've not had a TV. Well, that's not entirely accurate. I have a TV. But it doesn't have a cable connection or an antenna, but it does have connections for my Wii and my server that I keep directly under it, which is what I use for watching the TV shows I'm actually interested in (via Hulu or downloading).

It's way cheaper than paying for Cable, and the one time I tried setting up an antenna, I got crap for reception and it added more cables to the mess behind it, so I just threw it out.
Click to expand...

If you live in Cincinnati and have a tv but no cable/sat you can always get an antennae and tuner/converter box that converts the new digital signals (no more UHF/VHF signals...that went away a few years back) to your tv and it comes in clear as a bell (high definition). In Cincinnati there are 46 channels you can get for free. If you already have a high definition digital HDTV, you just need to get an antennae.

Greater Cincinnati and Dayton Digital TV Channels and Free Reception.
 
GrendelQ said:
You don't think that methods of language acquisition directly impact literacy? I've read many studies to the contrary.
Click to expand...

To the point of what we're talking about (oral/verbal/auditory vs visual/ASL), no, I did not think that literacy was directly impacted. To the best of my knowledge, you can teach a native signer to read and write just as well as you can teach someone who communicates via speech.

kokonut said:
If you live in Cincinnati and have a tv but no cable/sat you can always get an antennae and tuner/converter box that converts the new digital signals (no more UHF/VHF signals...that went away a few years back) to your tv and it comes in clear as a bell (high definition). In Cincinnati there are 46 channels you can get for free. If you already have a high definition digital HDTV, you just need to get an antennae.

Greater Cincinnati and Dayton Digital TV Channels and Free Reception.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I had one of those. (Digital antenna all in one thing - it was one my parents had before they got a new TV with a digital converter and antenna built in or something.) The location I was at just had really crappy reception.

No loss to me, though, since I've no desire to watch anything on broadcast TV. I have no real interest in watching a specific TV show at a set time, and my computer setup right now is far superior to most peoples' home theaters of a similar size.

The computer that's connected to the TV has a Blu-Ray player and two 1.5 TB hard drives that are mounted as samba shares on the network so that every other computer in the house can read and write to them. I can control my TV as a stereo or TV playback from any computer that I have access to via a web interface.
 
Bottesini said:
It wasn't a choice for people who can't read and write.
Click to expand...

Let us discuss this. Suppose John Doe is a deaf person who just happen to NOT get into a good education system that taught him to read and write. As a minor the fault is on the backs of his parents. So your point, that it was not John's choice is valid and I agree with you. His inability to read and write is a result not of HIS making.
Moving on in his life, lets make it a point that John, as an adult, becomes aware how difficult his life is due to his inability to read and write. However, again, lets make it a point that John in his daily life comes into contact with both deaf and hearing people whom make John aware of public assistance that is FREE to him so he can begin learning to read and write. I know this assistance is there and is free because I deal with it on a weekly basic.
The result is two choices of John, he alone makes the decision. John can either accept the assistance and be on his way toward learning to read and write, there is no time limit nor cost limit to John, so he can take as long as necessary to learn. This would result, for John, a better life possibility sure to his being able to read and write. The fact he is ASL will not now hold him back in life because he is not ASL-only.
The second possibility is John rejects the free assistance and continues his life as ASL-only with the inability to read and write. John, alone, made this choice not to take advantage of the wonderful opportunity available to him.
Yes, this is very sad but some Johns do choice the second.
 
Last edited:
I am not impressed with the literacy levels of most hearing people. Yes, MOST.
 
rolling7 said:
Let us discuss this. Suppose John Doe is a deaf person who just happen to NOT get into a good education system that taught him to read and write. As a minor the fault is on the backs of his parents. So your point, that it was not John's choice is valid and I agree with you. His inability to read and write is a result not of HIS making.
Moving on in his life, lets make it a point that John, as an adult, becomes aware how difficult his life is due to his inability to read and write. However, again, lets make it a point that John in his daily life comes into contact with both deaf and hearing people whom make John aware of public assistance that is FREE to him so he can begin learning to read and write. I know this assistance is there and is free because I deal with it on a weekly basic.
The result is two choices of John, he alone makes the decision. John can either accept the assistance and be on his way toward learning to read and write, there is no time limit nor cost limit to John, so he can take as long as necessary to learn. This would result, for John, a better life possibility sure to his being able to read and write. The fact he is ASL will not now hold him back in life because he is not ASL-only.
The second possibility is John rejects the free assistance and continues his life as ASL-only with the inability to read and write. John, alone, made this choice not to take advantage of the wonderful opportunity available to him.
Yes, this is very sad but some Johns do choice the second.
Click to expand...

If John has no cognitive processing issues from his poor educational upbringing yes, if one is able to recognize by being literate, it can get you far in life, it is their responsibility to take action. However, if one has so many language delays and deficits then, it would be a HUGE challenge to achieve literacy and would take a lot of willingness and patience on the person.
 
shel90 said:
If John has no cognitive processing issues from his poor educational upbringing yes, if one is able to recognize by being literate, it can get you far in live, it is their responsibility to take action. However, if one has so many language delays and deficits then, it would be a HUGE challenge to achieve literacy and would take a lot of willingness and patience on the person.
Click to expand...

rolling7 - the reading and writing lessons that John could have gotten for free- the teacher knew ASL?
 
Oh he did? That's great. I'm also volunteering this Fall at a Literacy Workshop set up by a Deaf organization contending with the increasing rate of illiterate students attending the only english deaf school in town and it's oral only. No ASL. The deaf org had been fighting the school for a long long time to include ASL and now it's the deaf org, not the school that has a literacy workshop set up.

Anyway, about John, who knows what his life story is that made him so resistant to wanting to learn to read and write. I bet you there's more to the story than him just "not feeling like it".

But rolling7 - what made you bring up ASL-only Deafs in a discussion that's about not needing to know how to speak and listen first in order to learn to read and write? It was pretty out of left field.
 
DeafCaroline said:
Oh he did? That's great. I'm also volunteering this Fall at a Literacy Workshop set up by a Deaf organization contending with the increasing rate of illiterate students attending the only english deaf school in town and it's oral only. No ASL. The deaf org had been fighting the school for a long long time to include ASL and now it's the deaf org, not the school that has a literacy workshop set up.
Click to expand...

Do you think that the method of language acquisition (Oral-English vs. ASL) has a bearing on the literacy rate at that school?
 
DeafCaroline said:
What did the studies say?
Click to expand...

Especially if you are getting involved or have been involved in deaf education and literacy, I highly recommend [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Evidence-Based-Practice-Educating-Professional-Perspectives/dp/0199735409"]this book: Evidence-Based Practice in Educating Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students (Professional Perspectives on Deafness)[/ame] -- which is packed full of research and new statistics as well as the most recent issue of the Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, featuring some new research on literacy that includes some discussion of methods of teaching and setting. Takeaways from both these sources are often woven into the responses on the [ame="http://www.rit.edu/ntid/educatingdeafchildren/"]educatingdeafchildren[/ame] site.
 
GrendelQ said:
Do you think that the method of language acquisition (Oral-English vs. ASL) has a bearing on the literacy rate at that school?
Click to expand...

If anything, I would assume that if there are any literacy rate correlations, they would come about due to teachers not being fluent in the language (spoken English or ASL) they're teaching in, and thus having the students attempting to learn literacy in a language other than their native language.

I would imagine trying to teach someone how to read and write Latin, who doesn't already know it, with a teacher who only speaks Latin, would have difficulties.
 
GrendelQ said:
Especially if you are getting involved or have been involved in deaf education and literacy, I highly recommend this book: Evidence-Based Practice in Educating Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students (Professional Perspectives on Deafness -- which is packed full of research and new statistics as well as the most recent issue of the Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, featuring some new research on literacy that includes some discussion of methods of teaching and setting. Takeaways from both these sources are often woven into the responses on the educatingdeafchildren site.
Click to expand...

That's a good book.
 
GrendelQ said:
Do you think that the method of language acquisition (Oral-English vs. ASL) has a bearing on the literacy rate at that school?
Click to expand...

It goes back to the same argument....ASL is fully accessible to deaf children, meaning that there are no guessing games involved as opposed to oralism so the risks of missing out and becoming delayed are much much lower with any signed languaged than any spoken language. it is like trying to get blind children to develop language through print without brialle.
 
StSapphire said:
If anything, I would assume that if there are any literacy rate correlations, they would come about due to teachers not being fluent in the language (spoken English or ASL) they're teaching in, and thus having the students attempting to learn literacy in a language other than their native language.

I would imagine trying to teach someone how to read and write Latin, who doesn't already know it, with a teacher who only speaks Latin, would have difficulties.
Click to expand...

You think that many teachers at oral schools, or at least, at this particular oral school, are not fluent in English?
 
Back
Top