For those who suport NCLB..take a hard look at this cartoon

[Berry]

My HS chem/physics teacher told us that science was not the quest for truth, but the quest for understanding, and even established laws had the potential to be disproven. He was my favorite science teacher because, unlike the rest of the science teachers I had who just went through the motions, he encouraged his students to question everything around them.

You are very lucky to have met such a teacher. He would have been my favorite also.

 

[deafskeptic]

What you see as the demise of literacy I see as the redefinition of literacy.

Being able to read and write alone does not a person either literate or illiterate. Or to put it another way one critic said of a novel, "Its only redeeming quality is that the kind of person who would enjoy reading it, one hundred years ago would not have been able to read."

Just as Shakespeare was once a pop cultural phenomenon whose low brow humor showed the ignorance of the audience he catered too -- so does the reading of the plays by "literate" people today.

You see Shakespeare was meant to be watched on stage to be fully understood.

Whether you accept it or not a play signed in ASL is truer to the meaning of the original bard than a sit down reading of it in English in a classroom.



The written language is over rated because it is considered to be superior to spoken/signed languages -- And it is not. Simply because it is virtually impossible to convey the full meaning of what is said/signed using the written word alone.

Being able to read and write is handy, it is useful, and it is fun -- But being able to do it does not increase one's intelligence, knowledge, or abilities one whit.

It was NOT the invention of the written language that augmented humanities ability to store and distribute knowledge. It was technology -- The invention of the printing press which made the ability to read and write a useful skill worth having.

Now we have NEW technology wherein the ability to pass videos with pictures, sounds -- and SIGNS to vast numbers of people even faster than the printed word. And with this new technology knowledge can be gained quicker, easier, faster, and more completely than with the printed word.

If you don't believe me go to sites like Khan Academy and RichKidSmartKid.com - Give your children a financial education head start! and DCMP.org :: Home

ASL is a visual language so theater, videos and movies area much better mediums than prose.
You could say Shakesphere was the bestselling playwright of day. Popular =/= bad.

 

[deafskeptic]

My HS chem/physics teacher told us that science was not the quest for truth, but the quest for understanding, and even established laws had the potential to be disproven. He was my favorite science teacher because, unlike the rest of the science teachers I had who just went through the motions, he encouraged his students to question everything around them.

I like your science teacher. I like his mindset.

 

[deafskeptic]

There is nothing wrong with valuing everything you learned in school. Nor is there anything wrong with valuing certain things and disdaining others. Nor is there anything wrong with learning what you were taught.

My problem has always been with the latter. I never quite learned what I was taught. I always learned something different.

Teachers taught me to obey: I learned to question authority.

Teachers taught me science had all the answers: I learned that scientists had forgotten the value of questioning what they thought they knew.

I could go on but you get the point.

Oralism taught me to question what others believe.

 

[Daredevel7]

Maybe I'm wrong. I hope she'll come clarify.

I was playing devil's advocate. I personally think we have to have a standard curriculum because, well, frankly, we gotta start somewhere. I personally do think English is an useful thing to learn, but then again I also think that trigonometry is an useful thing to learn, too. I think people who put down English in this thread are trying to make others see that English isn't all that. I think they are trying to show that just because it can be useful, doesn't mean it is important.

I was trying to look at it from another perspective: comparing English to other subjects. I see that learning English is similar to learning math. It's very useful (I'll even go so far to say.. IMPORTANT *gasp*) to have a basic knowledge of both subjects in America. However, at some point, learning more of it (English or Math) will be useless for most people. And learning more of it will be useful for some people.

And one can easily be fine without math at all in life, right? Couldn't the same be said for English?

Berry's idea of an individualized education is great on paper, but I don't really see that happening, especially when there's so many extracurricular activities that can be utilized to encourage and further one's interest. Plus, isn't that what college is for?

I know I wouldn't allow my theoretical kid to completely focus on the one interest in his life....

Football.

Is that a bad thing to do?

 

[jillio]

I don't have a problem with a standardized curriculum, nor do I have a problem with minimum standards. What I have a problem with is the misuse of standardized test scores. A test is only as valid as the purpose for which it is intended. The standardized testing currently being used was not intended to be applied to deaf students.

For all those that are so pro standardized testing to determine these things...what population was used to norm those tests? What criteria were used to determine grade level functioning? How are the subtests weighted? Who is interpreting the meaning of the scores? Do you even understand percentile rankings or grade level scoring? Come on, people.

 

[shel90]

Oralism taught me to question what others believe.

Really? It was the opposite for me. oralism taught me that hearing people were always right and I shouldnt question them.

Glad you didnt learn it the way I did.

 

[deafskeptic]

Really? It was the opposite for me. oralism taught me that hearing people were always right and I shouldnt question them.

Glad you didnt learn it the way I did.

It taught me to question because my parents were in deep denial even with the facts facing them and the more they tried to control my behavior the worse it got.

I have always believed oralism is the reason why I question everything after a while.

 

[deafskeptic]

I don't have a problem with a standardized curriculum, nor do I have a problem with minimum standards. What I have a problem with is the misuse of standardized test scores. A test is only as valid as the purpose for which it is intended. The standardized testing currently being used was not intended to be applied to deaf students.

For all those that are so pro standardized testing to determine these things...what population was used to norm those tests? What criteria were used to determine grade level functioning? How are the subtests weighted? Who is interpreting the meaning of the scores? Do you even understand percentile rankings or grade level scoring? Come on, people.

When I take the standardized English test designed for the hearing, I tend to bomb the phonics section while excelling in other sections (except spelling). The last time I took it, I came out with a ten grade reading level because I did poorly in the phonics section.

With the SAT HI. I get college grade level in English because it's designed around the deaf's strengths not their weakness.

 

[jillio]

It taught me to question because my parents were in deep denial even with the facts facing them and the more they tried to control my behavior the worse it got.

I have always believed oralism is the reason why I question everything after a while.

You know, there is an unpublished study posted around here that actually confirms the fact that parents see what they want to see, and it is generally not what an expert or the child involved sees.

 

[jillio]

When I take the standardized English test designed for the hearing, I tend to bomb the phonics section while excelling in other sections (except spelling). The last time I took it, I came out with a ten grade reading level because I did poorly in the phonics section.

With the SAT HI. I get college grade level in English because it's designed around the deaf's strengths not their weakness.

Bingo. You can't just take a test normalized and standardized using a hearing population and scores normed on that hearing population and call it a valid testing instrument for the deaf population. It doesn't have anything to do with minimum standards. It has to do with invalid testing.

And when you are looking at grade level testing, it isn't giving you any information at all regarding what the level should be for a particular age/grade level, or what a 4th grade student is even capable of.

It is like what I was saying about IQ testing not long ago. The Wechsler IV for children and adolescents contains, in the manual, instructions for interpreting results for deaf kids. But there is absolutely nothing empirical to back up their interpretation recommendations. People think these instruments are black and white and tell the whole story. Truth of the matter is, they don't even tell a small part of the story when used as a single measure. Very dangerous to attempt to use a testing instrument for anything other than the express purpose it was intended and for the population it was intended.

 

[Jiro]

The impression I got from a number of posters is that English is unnecessary. Since we are discussing NCLB, which applies to the Unites States where the significant majority utilize English as their Native language, I was curious how those with that position would respond. Legally binding contracts are not something one should take lightly as they are enforceable in the court of law. If a person's native language is ASL which has no written form, with limited English skills how is it in their best interest to sign legal documents which they do not understand?

As I stated; I understand it can be interpreted in ASL, but that does not change the words that are written on the page which they would be consenting to.

in case you didn't know, last month President Obama announced that states can be waived from NCLB (as long as they adopted a certain academic standard). Currently - NCLB law is being rewritten but it will take time. It is possible that NCLB will be phased out by 2013.

 

[SJCSue]

in case you didn't know, last month President Obama announced that states can be waived from NCLB (as long as they adopted a certain academic standard).

Last month, I heard that NYS is thinking about asking for a waiver from NCLB. I have not heard anything since then about the possible waiver.

 

[Berry]

I was playing devil's advocate. I personally think we have to have a standard curriculum because, well, frankly, we gotta start somewhere. I personally do think English is an useful thing to learn, but then again I also think that trigonometry is an useful thing to learn, too. I think people who put down English in this thread are trying to make others see that English isn't all that. I think they are trying to show that just because it can be useful, doesn't mean it is important.

I was trying to look at it from another perspective: comparing English to other subjects. I see that learning English is similar to learning math. It's very useful (I'll even go so far to say.. IMPORTANT *gasp*) to have a basic knowledge of both subjects in America. However, at some point, learning more of it (English or Math) will be useless for most people. And learning more of it will be useful for some people.

And one can easily be fine without math at all in life, right? Couldn't the same be said for English?

Berry's idea of an individualized education is great on paper, but I don't really see that happening, especially when there's so many extracurricular activities that can be utilized to encourage and further one's interest. Plus, isn't that what college is for?

I know I wouldn't allow my theoretical kid to completely focus on the one interest in his life....

Football.

Is that a bad thing to do?

I spent the morning forming a reply to this... But unfortunately somehow the Opera search became my default search engine and it evidently allows you to accidentally delete all your tabs without warning you.

Am really irritated and will not rewrite it again today.

 

[Deafguy25]

Bingo. You can't just take a test normalized and standardized using a hearing population and scores normed on that hearing population and call it a valid testing instrument for the deaf population. It doesn't have anything to do with minimum standards. It has to do with invalid testing.

And when you are looking at grade level testing, it isn't giving you any information at all regarding what the level should be for a particular age/grade level, or what a 4th grade student is even capable of.

It is like what I was saying about IQ testing not long ago. The Wechsler IV for children and adolescents contains, in the manual, instructions for interpreting results for deaf kids. But there is absolutely nothing empirical to back up their interpretation recommendations. People think these instruments are black and white and tell the whole story. Truth of the matter is, they don't even tell a small part of the story when used as a single measure. Very dangerous to attempt to use a testing instrument for anything other than the express purpose it was intended and for the population it was intended.

Then you are saying that deaf people are fundamentally different from hearing people. When does that happen? Just deaf from birth? How about hard of hearing from birth? How about born hearing with a fast progressive loss? How about born hearing but deafened by illness before age 2? When does the hearing loss become the person?

Do you also refuse to use standardized testing on people from racial minorities?

 

[posts from hell]

Then you are saying that deaf people are fundamentally different from hearing people. When does that happen? Just deaf from birth? How about hard of hearing from birth? How about born hearing with a fast progressive loss? How about born hearing but deafened by illness before age 2? When does the hearing loss become the person?

Do you also refuse to use standardized testing on people from racial minorities?

Do you disagree with the statement that the deaf are different from hearing people?

 

[Berry]

Then you are saying that deaf people are fundamentally different from hearing people. When does that happen? Just deaf from birth? How about hard of hearing from birth? How about born hearing with a fast progressive loss? How about born hearing but deafened by illness before age 2? When does the hearing loss become the person?

Do you also refuse to use standardized testing on people from racial minorities?

There was a big thing about this a long time ago. It was determined that the I.Q. tests given favored the WASP set: White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. It therefore tended to discriminate against non-whites and even whites if they happened to be, say Catholic.

Or to put it this way, If you were white and memorized "To Be Or Not To Be" as culturally appropriate, you were considered to be very intelligent, but if you were Black and memorized "The Signifying Monkey" which is actually more difficult, and is also culturally correct -- Whites are going to dock you for cussing (obscene language) and incorrect grammar.

Sort of like hearing people who are offended by the sign for "fecal elimination".

So yes, it has already been proven that standardized tests deny ethnic and racial minorities their rightful place -- Unless they "White up."

 

[jillio]

Then you are saying that deaf people are fundamentally different from hearing people. When does that happen? Just deaf from birth? How about hard of hearing from birth? How about born hearing with a fast progressive loss? How about born hearing but deafened by illness before age 2? When does the hearing loss become the person?

Do you also refuse to use standardized testing on people from racial minorities?

No, but it doesn't surprise me that you would attempt to distort what I'm saying.

You have just proven to me that you are a fake. Any DoD understands completely the effects cultural and perceptive differences have on individuals.

What a liar you are.

And, no, I don't use culturally innappropriate testing on racial minorities. It is really frightening that you claim to want to be a teacher. But then you claimed that you were going to do that months ago, and still haven't followed through. I don't think we have anything to worry about. With your inability to understand testing, you'd never pass the Praxis anyway.

 

[deafbajagal]

I don't mind discussions that derive from good and well
-thought out questions...but some of the "questions" are really being asked by a troll for the sole purpose of derailing a good thread. I'm pretty sure most of you are picking up that pattern of a certain poster.

 

[Deafguy25]

No, but it doesn't surprise me that you would attempt to distort what I'm saying.

You have just proven to me that you are a fake. Any DoD understands completely the effects cultural and perceptive differences have on individuals.

What a liar you are.

And, no, I don't use culturally innappropriate testing on racial minorities. It is really frightening that you claim to want to be a teacher. But then you claimed that you were going to do that months ago, and still haven't followed through. I don't think we have anything to worry about. With your inability to understand testing, you'd never pass the Praxis anyway.

Who are you to determine I'm not Deaf enough? You aren't Deaf at all. You haven't lived my life and you have no idea what it means to be me. You come in here and pretend to understand deaf people, but the truth is that you think you are here to save Deaf people. We can and actually DO speak for ourselves and don't need a hearing wannabe to come in and proclaim who and what we need to be.

I am in school to become a teacher of the deaf. I haven't even been a member of this board for "months".

My parents taught me that deaf people are fully equal to hearing people. They taught me that we can do anything hearing people can, including passing an English test. I'm sorry that you believe otherwise.