R
rockdrummer
Guest
I don't agree with that.you have to accept the fact that people don't want to deal with deaf people rather they are oral or use Sign language.
I don't agree with that.you have to accept the fact that people don't want to deal with deaf people rather they are oral or use Sign language.
When I was working as an aide for a deaf program at a public school in AZ, I came up with an idea of an inservice for the district about how to educate the deaf/hoh students, work with interpreters and any other information about deafness. I submitted my idea to the principal and you know what he said? He said that they didnt need a a deaf person telling them how to run their program and that the head of the special ed dept knows what she is doing. I checked out her background and her degrees were working with children with learning disabilities. No wonder the program was failing the children big time and I left it because I felt like I was talking to a wall with the administrators and I needed my MA degree in Deaf ed to make myself more credible since I had a BA in Special ED only but I ended up staying in MD instead of going back to AZ like I planned to. I really would love to be a consultant for the mainstreamed programs and help educators who have no training in deaf ed effectively teach deaf/hoh chidlren but I dont think I will get the funding for that anytime soon due to the bad economy and budget cuts. I am seriously thinking of working for the dept of special ed on the federal level. I just need to take more classes on policy making and all that. Just takes time to build the experience and skills to get qualified to work at that level.
I don't agree with that.
I want to make sure that I understand you right. You mean federal government depts?
yes...for the Dept of Ed. Just one of my future options.
oh? care to elaborate on why you disagree with which one?
I don't agree with that. Meaning I don't agree that I have to accept the fact that people don't want to deal with deafies regardless of if they are oral or use sign language. I simply don't agree with that. I don't think anyone can speak for everyone. Myself and I am sure many on this and other forums are more than willing to deal with deafies. Where I will agree it becomes difficult is when there are no common modes of commuication. If a deaf person only knows ASL and not any spoken or written English and the hearing person only knows English then yes obviously there will be a problem communicating but that doesn't mean the two don't want to deal with eachother. It just means that they don't have a common mode to communicate. I think it's more of the ability to communicate rather than the desire to deal with eachother.you have to accept the fact that people don't want to deal with deaf people rather they are oral or use Sign language.
Lighthouse said.
I don't agree with that. Meaning I don't agree that I have to accept the fact that people don't want to deal with deafies regardless of if they are oral or use sign language. I simply don't agree with that. I don't think anyone can speak for everyone. Myself and I am sure many on this and other forums are more than willing to deal with deafies. Where I will agree it becomes difficult is when there are no common modes of commuication. If a deaf person only knows ASL and not any spoken or written English and the hearing person only knows English then yes obviously there will be a problem communicating but that doesn't mean the two don't want to deal with eachother. It just means that they don't have a common mode to communicate. I think it's more of the ability to communicate rather than the desire to deal with eachother.
the Milan conference was over two centuries ago. With all of the discussion in the profession about bi-bi being a better model why is it then that the deaf leaders are not able to invoke change if it is truly beneficial to the majority?
Lighthouse said.
I don't agree with that. Meaning I don't agree that I have to accept the fact that people don't want to deal with deafies regardless of if they are oral or use sign language. I simply don't agree with that. I don't think anyone can speak for everyone. Myself and I am sure many on this and other forums are more than willing to deal with deafies. Where I will agree it becomes difficult is when there are no common modes of commuication. If a deaf person only knows ASL and not any spoken or written English and the hearing person only knows English then yes obviously there will be a problem communicating but that doesn't mean the two don't want to deal with eachother. It just means that they don't have a common mode to communicate. I think it's more of the ability to communicate rather than the desire to deal with eachother.
I have 10 plus experience working in different educational settings and it is always the mainstreamed programs that pushed for oralism and call the deaf children oral failures if they dont succeed with it. Even my own personal experience was the same when people talked about my brother about how he failed to be an oral success. It doesnt need to be said..the attitude is out there.
Ok I will get back to you to that issue later.
I only can say one thing is: why do you think anyone who want to become a special education teacher in the first place?
Of course, not ALL, SOME of them.
*** I have to re read your post without misunderstanding or jump to the conclusion. I am at work right now. it's hard for me to think how to give you good exmaples.
I just hope they make it a deaf human rights to learn ASL in school like it is a child's human rights to learn to read.
This isn't about "better education" anymore than reading is. just human rights.
I think that access to fluent language would be a human right, but a particular language, no.
I think so for a deaf child