Hard Of Hearing But Do Not Use Asl...

[CaseyH15]

Thank you Calvin for reopening the thread!

 

[CaseyH15]

I think any language is beautiful and worth learning. I think it's true that we must adapt to the world, but the world consists of many cultures and languages, ASL being one of them. The more open minded I am, the more informed I am. That is my goal; to have a better understanding of people and the world.

 

[BecLak]

Well actually to be fair, not every company will do that. For example, a restaurant that serves english speaking customers is not going to hire spanish speaking people. It just is unreasonable for the company to have to hire BOTH an interpreter and the employee just for that.

I was stating my opinion meaning on a much broader spectrum. Government offices will have statements and documents translated into many foreign languages; global conferences use earpieces for interpreters to interpret in their own languages. Everyone accepts that. On an individual scale, taking your restaurant scenario as an example, if a customer comes in, who so happens to be a foreign tourist, for the most part the restaurant owner and staff will not force them to speak a language they dont know, but rather will find some other way to communicate in order to make the customer happy and wanting to come back. Why can't Hearing people be more accomodating to Deaf people in the same way?

 

[A Nihilist]

Yes that is true, you're talking about the viewpoint as a customer. I've had services accommodate my hearing issue as well. I even had a mechanic email me instead of calling me so no problems there. It's just that it starts to become economically unrealistic to hire a foreigner and then also pay for an interpreter as well.

I mean put yourself in the shoes of the restaurant owner. Would you rather hire an english speaking employee for $10 a hour or pay a spanish person for $10 a hour plus, say $8 a hour for the interpreter? Not only that it takes more time communicating in that everything has to go through an interpreter. It's just not good business to pay more for less work.

On my end, I happen to work as a software programmer because it's one of the few fields in which it can actually be an advantage being deaf. I can concentrate easily in an office environment and with emails and IMs communication is a non-issue. As a matter of fact when I started working at my current position they did chat meetings to accommodate me but realized they loved the fact they could save meetings into a word doc that they did chat meetings even when I was NOT in them.

And as for governments, well do you notice that all the highway signs are in english. For example, there's "Stop", "Yield", "Exit 1", etc.... with your logic why not make a spanish sign, german sign, swedish sign, etc... The problem is that it would be expensive creating all those signs just for multiple languages not to mention signs would have to be ridiculously huge. can you see a stop sign saying "STOP, HALT, SLUTA, DETENER" That would be ridiculous.

And as for global conferences, in my job we are working with a contractor in India but we don't speak in Hindi nor do we use a translator service. The indian contractors converse with us in english. And I'm sure you've heard of call centers in India. Again, they communicate in english instead of using a translation service.

You are right in that there should be accommodations for those with disabilities but my only issue is just how reasonable they are.

 

[DeafDucky]

It's a fine line with that to be sure. For the most part over the years (I am a QA Tester in IT by the way- yes looking for work lol)- I've managed to get away with not needing a whole lot of accommodations. Interpreters sometimes for big meetings. Phone amplifier (last one was an 'in-line' one- knew I should have kept it when it was thrown into my stuff...too honest) and even a little light once when the maintenance/phone guys managed to jerry rig my phone to add it lol. Same with AN- Emails, use white board, IMs- One of my Team Leads tried to get that on our systems but they refused to- they being Upper Management. She wanted to as she knew it'd help me.

The only other one I can think of- is to allow me the ability to tweak my desktop so that I can see/read the display. I can't believe people can read stuff that tiny at the now recommended screen resolution (whatever it is at the moment).

 

[MM2]

sign like english or any language for that matter, can provide the amount of detail the user wishes. that detail is dependent on the users level of fluency ie the vocab among other things of the user, and that users will to attain it. re the language itself,.

ASL can actually state more things then english can, in different ways in different detail. more detail. ASL does convey more ideas and information then english ever can..after all you only have one mouth, you have two hands ten fingers and a very malleable face for asl, plus the actual world in three dimensional space we use in our language every day..alas a picture is worth a thousand words..anyone who ever thinks ASL doesn't have the capabilities to convey ideas on par with english or to use your words isnt "valid" enough for them doesn't know ASL fluently. your level of fluency is hardly reasonably well, if that's your idea. if you were fluent or reasonably fluent you would know exactly how ASL does provide the signer with the tools to convey details in very great detail if one chooses too.

in other words you finding ASL not "valid" enough only demonstrated your level of its acquisition.

when i state ASL is a powerful language capable of out performing english in a number of ways, again i should be clear that when it comes to languages any language, its the user of it and their skill which is the more important then the actual language being used. english like all auricular languages grants its users the capability to talk out both sides of yours mouths at the same time which is a neat trick, indeed politicians are notorious for that. ASL gives its user allot more..then english does. in our capability to convey ideas. when it comes down to it english is not up to standards.

oralist even know it...hence they're very real fear. they wont nor can they due to ideological constructs admit it. but they know it.

to use an example to try to illustrate a point. re fluency

someone who is fluent in english at a grade 4 level of reading comprehension is still using the same language as someone at a graduate level of english in a university. the language is the same. what is different is the users ability to tap the language for its resources to convey ideas. in more complex or subtle ways. depending on what is needed to be stated and understood. this capability is founded on a body of knowledge (for lack of a better term)each language contains ie its vocab these have to be constantly learned and used to access what they provide.

the user who doesn't attain a high vocab still is using a highly power language english, just not to that languages fullness. same goes re you and sign. i question how reasonably fluent you are in sign if you've never used it outside the home, nor have ever used an interpreter. where have you learned sign from? a language needs to be used with its users to gain true fluency...that is any language. period. and users is plural. i also want to stress native users. your not going to be fluent or reasonably fluent if your not signing with native signers. i'm not questioning that you use sign, i take your words for it, i'm stating your use of it only in your home with one human being is not really a measure of fluency..

your issue with sign isnt a deficiency re sign or ASL to be more specific. its your lack of acquiring its strengths and vocab to be able to tap ASLs strengths. ASL is more then "get me my tea" or "butter the toast" or change the tv' or "get me a shot"or answer there door" or any signs you can use in the home re the home. ...in all sorts of combinations granted

you admit you've never use sign outside the home, so i take it you found sign not "valid" for you in the home. that level of signing vocab is fairly low on the fluency scale to attain..



using an interpreter in any language doesn't signal dependency or suggests you no longer have the ability to communicate. using a terp signals the opposite. it signals that individual wishes to communicate in their own language. one they can use fully, to be understood and to understand..one hasnt lost anything..let alone the ability to communicate. i sign am, fluent and rarely use terps..because i rarely have too. when i do need them. ie when im dealing with the bugerment. i use them, the very act of using a terp states rather loud (pun intended) and clear we want to communicate and can communicate.




if someone sees they are in a better position and doing themselves a better favor by refusing to use a terp so be it. it doesn't make any statement at all re sign or ASL its just an individuals personal what ever...using a terp is certainly our right, that also doesn't state anything as to what ever differences you see between those who use terps and those who dont. how is it envy? if you see the Deaf using terps as doing themselves a disservice, or to use your words again to be more clear.




why envy us?



well that fact that bugs you about us, is a fact of life for any language and culture group. any.

if you don't want to accept our community and culture then why even be bugged by our wild and crazy idea that in order to be accepted by us one has to

shhhhh gosh shirk the thought...heavens forbid..

use our language...

if you are what you are..
why bother yourself with what others like us Deaf even do?

I'm sorry if it came across negative to sign users, I just put my own stance on it. That I have never been part of the deaf community anyway and rooted still in my ex-hearing background, I didn't see much point in acquiring the high level of sign needed to get the detail I want, when text/lip-reading could provide it to me more efficiently. I'd had issues regarding access because systems assumed all deaf people use or want sign language, and could not get alternatives. To be frank many deaf I see DON'T have the degree of signing skills they need to get the details they want either. Seemed to work via some 'chinese whispers' approach...I suppose with due respect it's 'horses for courses'. Has any survey taken place as to the levels of signing qualifications deaf people actually have ? Being able to sign, doesn't mean being able to take in everything that way. Like hearing people academics are key and literacy. This would shed better light on how much detail they are taking in, since even using an interpreter to 'fill in gaps' cannot be 100% effective ? No disrespect is intended, it's a matter of what works best, and it isn't sign for all deaf people, and we should respect others don't find it effective for them. If you ask a question and don't like the answer, sorry.

 

[hoichi]

I'm sorry if it came across negative to sign users, I just put my own stance on it.

your stance just demonstrates you know very little of what your on about...

I
That I have never been part of the deaf community anyway

your not part of our Community why even bother coming here? but i invite you to be part of our community. we are open to you. all you have to do is learn sign...and we will help you

and rooted still in my ex-hearing background, I didn't see much point in acquiring the high level of sign needed to get the detail I want, when text/lip-reading could provide it to me more efficiently. I'd had issues regarding access because systems assumed all deaf people use or want sign language, and could not get alternatives.

you first stated you felt sign couldnt give you the detail you wished, your statement by me was shown to be in factual error in regards to linguistics and how languages work. now your stating you didnt feel much a point in aquiring sign to a high level of detail. so if you didnt feel a point in it, why then even be bothered when you found you obviously didn't acquire the leval of detail in a language by your own statements you admit you didn't feel a point to learning any way?

To be frank many deaf I see DON'T have the degree of signing skills they need to get the details they want either.

your not fluent in our language, frankly you don't have the know how to state this. how the hell do you know? further, its not even surprising, considering we use the convention deaf for those who DO NOT sign, and are themselves trapped in the audiological framework of loss, lacking, broken goods, sick, in need of a cure and a of a fix. so on ad nasueum..
we Deaf on the other hand (pun intended) use capital D. for Deaf, for those like me who DO sign.

so yes, it its no wonder deaf you may have met were not fluent in sign. no kiddin

Seemed to work via some 'chinese whispers' approach...I suppose with due respect it's 'horses for courses'. Has any survey taken place as to the levels of signing qualifications deaf people actually have ?

no it doesn't work like that all. ASL works like any language works. in order to gain fluency YOU need to use it and use it and use it...like any damn language, Chinese or english or what ever...the simple fact you seem to think its some super chinese magick or whispers only betrays your very little exposure to it..what ever sign syou have for "get my tea" or "rub my back" isnt not even close to the knowledge you need to be able to make the claims you make...and at least do it with a straight face.


all sorts of surveys and serious studies through the years have taken place..happy hunting...you an find a bunch via gally online library if you took the time and where sincere.

Being able to sign, doesn't mean being able to take in everything that way.

again like ANY language. being able to talk doesn't give someone high fluency. that person in english ro ANY language has to gain the fluency by acquiring the language and using it. English like sign has specialized vocabulary for its specialized fields. ie science, or philosophy or medicine ect ect....

a person at a grade four reading level will not have the fluency in the language to use it in as an example a chemistry lad...that fluency needs to be acquired.

Like hearing people academics are key and literacy.

i wouldn't argue academics are key..but we have them too...

This would shed better light on how much detail they are taking in, since even using an interpreter to 'fill in gaps' cannot be 100% effective ? No disrespect is intended, it's a matter of what works best, and it isn't sign for all deaf people, and we should respect others don't find it effective for them. If you ask a question and don't like the answer, sorry.

your just stating nonsense. here.

your not fluent in our language yet you wish to make statements about its effectiveness or our terps..

heres a hint
get fluent in sign first..
then state your ideas about how our language works or not..what its capabilities are or not, and how it adds up or not.

no need to apologize to me. but you should at least educate yourself before you find yourself as you are now, discussing a language you know very little judging by your own statements about. with others who actually are fluent.

as for sign being for all deaf people.
its for ALL people. anyone at all.

its for all Deaf people.

those deaf who refuse to sign for whatever their reasons, and long to be hearie and remain so, at all costs regardless of what ever snake oil they bought into, isnt our concern..maybe deaf should take your advice and respect us. and leave us the hell alone..

sign is for Deaf!!
sign is for ALL

c'mon
ill help you get fluent if thats what you want...

 

[Cappy]

Here is a helpful (at least it helped me understand their differences) list of sign languages and descriptions, used in the USA. I am a cross between PSE and SEE. I appreciate it when signers mouth the words when signing, if they do not, then I get lost easily and become a thorn in everyones butt. (I know, I'm a weird bird)
https://signsoflifeasl.wordpress.com/2013/02/27/3-forms-of-sign-language-asl-vs-pse-vs-see/
3 Forms of Sign Language: ASL vs. PSE vs. SEE
Posted on February 27, 2013 by signsoflifeasl
There are three major forms of Sign Language currently used in the United States: American Sign (ASL), Pidgin Signed English (PSE), and Signed Exact English (SEE).

American Sign Language (ASL)

ASL is used by many deaf in the United States, thus its use promotes assimilation into the Deaf Community. ASL is a visual language, and speech-reading or listening skills are not needed to learn ASL fluently. Because of its visual nature, ASL is very graphic, and understanding of concepts can be promoted more easily. It has developed over time through usage by deaf individuals and is a free-flowing, natural language. ASL is a language complete in itself. It is not usually written or spoken, but can be translated, just like French or German, to English and vice versa. ASL has it’s own syntax and grammar. It does count as a language credit at University level, because it is a separate language. ASL usually follows the TIME + TOPIC + COMMENT structure.

Pidgin Signed English (PSE) or Signed English

PSE is probably the most widely used communication mode in the United States among deaf and hearing persons who work with them. Many teachers use PSE or Signed English. The vocabulary is drawn from ASL but follows English word order. Words that do not carry information (e.g. to, the, am, etc.) are often dropped, as are the word endings of English (e.g. -ed, -s, -ment, etc.). This means that the signer can easily speak while signing, since it is possible to keep pace with spoken English. It is simpler to learn than ASL or SEE, since one does not need to include all English endings, nor does one to master the structure or idioms of ASL.

Signing Exact English (SEE)

SEE is based upon signs drawn from ASL and expanded with words, prefixes, tenses, and endings to give a clear and complete visual presentation of English. The ASL sign for the concept of “pretty, lovely, beauty, beautiful” and other such synonyms is retained for beauty, initialized with P for pretty, L for lovely, and the suffix -ful is added for beautiful. The child thus has an opportunity to develop an expanded vocabulary. The learning of this English based sign system may be more comfortable for English-speaking parents. Maximum use of residual hearing and speech-reading is encouraged since the signs match the elements of spoken English. SEE encourages the incorporation of ASL features to show intonation visually. SEE does require more signing time that PSE, because of the word endings and prefixes, etc. Over-concentration on signing every word may lead to “colorless” signing.

 

[deafdyke]

Where a live there is quite a mix of deaf people with varying educational experiences: Clare School (oral deaf school), Willie Ross (total communication - speech with signed English), The Learning Center (ASL), ASD (ASL), plus many in mainstream programs with a variety of program formats.

When I meet another deaf person when I am out and about I don't assume the person signs or if they do sign they know ASL. Usually, I very subtlety ask if they sign or if it is a worker I may sign "thank you" to see if the person picks it up. If they do sign they will quickly respond. If not, I'll try another method of communication unless the person just doesn't seem interested in chatting.

Actually even thou Clarke is oral, they do allow ASL out of class. It's no longer " ASL is completely evil and verboten" Many of the students in the school age program, attend Clarke for elementary school for the quality of the education, rather then as a " get them oral and turn them out into the hearing world" approach.

 

[deafdyke]

We have gone down this road before.

Yes, deafness doesn't limit you physically, but not having a well rounded education and/or the necessary tools or skills to do the job does. It has very little to do with discrimination or bigotry: it's bringing the skills and the education needed to perform the job that does it. Since the deaf population makes up a very small percentage of the general population of any country, it is unreasonable to think that everyone should know ASL and it makes more sense that the deaf community adapt to communicating with the hearing world to make themselves more employable.

Here is a link to one of the many studies on the subject.

http://repository.wcsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=jadara

Would it astonish you that there are ORAL and mainstreamed dhh kids who don't have a well rounded education and or the nessary tools or skills to do skilled work? NOBODY is suggesting an ASL "monoglot" approach. Even at schools and programs for the Deaf, kids who only sign (don't have spoken language abilty and who don't wear HA or CI) are in the minority. The philosophy at pretty much almost all schools and programs for the Deaf (that use sign) is to equipt a kid with EVERYTHING. That means, Sign fluency, speech skills (if wanted/needed) literacy and so on and so on, so a dhh kid can have a variety of options, and be WELL ROUNDED educationally and socially!

 

[deafdyke]

This is a very touchy subject among the deaf community. But since you kindly asked me, I started sign in the 2nd or 3rd grade. I was also mainstreamed from Jr High thru HS. I did just fine. One thing that mystified me, some of my grade school deaffies went to an all deaf school. I could see the differences between them and me. I felt that I got the better education as to be more perpared for the hearing world.

How long ago was this? I mean I know in the past (before 1975) a lot of schools had VERY poor expectations for dhh kids. As a matter of fact, I remember reading something from 1975ish that said that dhh kids were functionally ID b/c of language issues. I think it does depend on the particular school and circumstances. There are still bad/low expectation schools..... but we've moved on overall from having universal bad deaf schools. I definitly think they need to reform the deaf schools big time!!! But there's always a reason for this or that.......and heck, there's lower tracking, and dhh kids being placed in inappropreate special ed settings too....so a hearing school setting might not always be the best. It depends on the circumstnaces, and available resources out there!

 

[deafdyke]

I am reasonably fluent in sign, but never use it outside the home (My partner is a sign user), nor have I ever used an interpreter, I've been deaf 47 years and not wanted one, I either lip-read, speak, or get it written down. Only recently as my lip-reading is deteriorating with age, have I used any support, (that was a one off because of a legal issue), but it still isn't sign language, but palantype. To be honest, I never found that sign language was valid enough for me, as I like detail and found sign didn't provide the level I wanted and was used to. But basically, I never want to be reliant on any other person, to see a Dr, go to a hospital etc..I think many who have lost hearing have this at the back of their decision whether to sign or not. Using an interpreter would signal dependency and suggest you no longer have the ability yourself to communicate. It is with some envy I see other deaf people with interpreters who don't see this at all, and believe it is something else, simple empowerment and a right.. This tends to show how the differences are between those who have always used interpreters and those who lose viable hearing and just won't. I do have a good speaking voice and never lost it when I went deaf, and speaking is still the main 'in' to communication for me, will I ever use sign full time/part time or a terp ? I don't think so.... One fact that bugs me is you really have to accept the 'Deaf' lifestyle (Culture/Community) approaches and integrate with them to get any real social advantage, and my 'roots' aren't there. I suppose Popeye put it best, I yam what I yam.

Why are people so fixtated on " OH NOES a terp makes you DEPENDENT? What does "dependent" even mean anyway? Why don't people view the usage of Cued Speech, HA, CI and other specialized tools as making them " dependant?" Why is it that usage of ONE tool (usually among MANY tools offered) automaticly translates into "dependancy?" If a Spanish speaker, a French speaker, god almost ANY and every language speaker requests an interpreter, they are not seen as " dependant" but simply as accessing a tool that will allow them to understand 100%, rather then using the weakness of English. You CAN speak English and not be skilled in sophsicated use of English after all.

 

[seb]

Would it astonish you that there are ORAL and mainstreamed dhh kids who don't have a well rounded education and or the nessary tools or skills to do skilled work? NOBODY is suggesting an ASL "monoglot" approach. Even at schools and programs for the Deaf, kids who only sign (don't have spoken language abilty and who don't wear HA or CI) are in the minority. The philosophy at pretty much almost all schools and programs for the Deaf (that use sign) is to equipt a kid with EVERYTHING. That means, Sign fluency, speech skills (if wanted/needed) literacy and so on and so on, so a dhh kid can have a variety of options, and be WELL ROUNDED educationally and socially!

Not at all; as has been said time and again, there are good and bad schools for hearing kids, just as there are good and bad schools for the deaf kids. What you describe is the dream sequence of all schools whether they are schools for the deaf or a school for the kids who can hear. The question you should be asking is: if these kids has received or is receiving such a great education that gave or gives the kid a variety of options, to be well rounded educationally and socially, then why is the unemployment rate of the deaf at 50% in the U.S.? Something is being done wrong and needs to be fixed.

Children attending public schools in the U.S. have not been tracked since the inclusion of Title VI in 1964, which basically outlawed it because it was discriminatory. There are those in education that say that was the last time education actually worked in the U.S., in other countries that still track kids, they end up sending kids out into the world prepared to make a living based on their abilities based on test scores that led them down the business, industrial or academic track. Today every kid in public schools are required to basically do the same or similar corse loads in order the graduate; basically the people in education have said every kid is capable of being a rocket scientist and unfortunately, that is not the case.

 

[Foxrac]

Not at all; as has been said time and again, there are good and bad schools for hearing kids, just as there are good and bad schools for the deaf kids. What you describe is the dream sequence of all schools whether they are schools for the deaf or a school for the kids who can hear. The question you should be asking is: if these kids has received or is receiving such a great education that gave or gives the kid a variety of options, to be well rounded educationally and socially, then why is the unemployment rate of the deaf at 50% in the U.S.? Something is being done wrong and needs to be fixed.

Children attending public schools in the U.S. have not been tracked since the inclusion of Title VI in 1964, which basically outlawed it because it was discriminatory. There are those in education that say that was the last time education actually worked in the U.S., in other countries that still track kids, they end up sending kids out into the world prepared to make a living based on their abilities based on test scores that led them down the business, industrial or academic track. Today every kid in public schools are required to basically do the same or similar corse loads in order the graduate; basically the people in education have said every kid is capable of being a rocket scientist and unfortunately, that is not the case.

Oh really, I think it is Rehabilitation Act of 1973 that allow deaf children to be served in hearing school instead of deaf school, not Title VI of 1964, also we have IDEA for K-12 too.

 

[MM2]

your stance just demonstrates you know very little of what your on about...




your not part of our Community why even bother coming here? but i invite you to be part of our community. we are open to you. all you have to do is learn sign...and we will help you



you first stated you felt sign couldnt give you the detail you wished, your statement by me was shown to be in factual error in regards to linguistics and how languages work. now your stating you didnt feel much a point in aquiring sign to a high level of detail. so if you didnt feel a point in it, why then even be bothered when you found you obviously didn't acquire the leval of detail in a language by your own statements you admit you didn't feel a point to learning any way?




your not fluent in our language, frankly you don't have the know how to state this. how the hell do you know? further, its not even surprising, considering we use the convention deaf for those who DO NOT sign, and are themselves trapped in the audiological framework of loss, lacking, broken goods, sick, in need of a cure and a of a fix. so on ad nasueum..
we Deaf on the other hand (pun intended) use capital D. for Deaf, for those like me who DO sign.

so yes, it its no wonder deaf you may have met were not fluent in sign. no kiddin



no it doesn't work like that all. ASL works like any language works. in order to gain fluency YOU need to use it and use it and use it...like any damn language, Chinese or english or what ever...the simple fact you seem to think its some super chinese magick or whispers only betrays your very little exposure to it..what ever sign syou have for "get my tea" or "rub my back" isnt not even close to the knowledge you need to be able to make the claims you make...and at least do it with a straight face.


all sorts of surveys and serious studies through the years have taken place..happy hunting...you an find a bunch via gally online library if you took the time and where sincere.



again like ANY language. being able to talk doesn't give someone high fluency. that person in english ro ANY language has to gain the fluency by acquiring the language and using it. English like sign has specialized vocabulary for its specialized fields. ie science, or philosophy or medicine ect ect....

a person at a grade four reading level will not have the fluency in the language to use it in as an example a chemistry lad...that fluency needs to be acquired.



i wouldn't argue academics are key..but we have them too...



your just stating nonsense. here.

your not fluent in our language yet you wish to make statements about its effectiveness or our terps..

heres a hint
get fluent in sign first..
then state your ideas about how our language works or not..what its capabilities are or not, and how it adds up or not.

no need to apologize to me. but you should at least educate yourself before you find yourself as you are now, discussing a language you know very little judging by your own statements about. with others who actually are fluent.

as for sign being for all deaf people.
its for ALL people. anyone at all.

its for all Deaf people.

those deaf who refuse to sign for whatever their reasons, and long to be hearie and remain so, at all costs regardless of what ever snake oil they bought into, isnt our concern..maybe deaf should take your advice and respect us. and leave us the hell alone..

sign is for Deaf!!
sign is for ALL

c'mon
ill help you get fluent if thats what you want...

You appear quite defensive, an overreaction I fear. We are all different and have our own needs, preferences and decisions to make regarding how we communicate. The topic asked a question, it should be stated if you don't want non-signers to offer a view. I'm quite prepared to be made more aware, but I could suggest you don't respond with an attack and told to go away as a means of doing it. It would deter others you want to raise awareness with. 47 years as a deaf person doesn't count here either unless you sign ? and consternation if you suggest well, it didn't work for me. How effectively you communicate depends on academics and background, mine was different to yours, so different strokes for different blokes. I Know many deaf who sign, and many who don't sign at all, it's life. I don't think the capitalisation of 'D' helps anyone at all, least of all deaf who don't sign, just indicates division. Like most who are deaf I have many issues to address without pandering to an ID crisis as well. I wish you well, but I don't think we are at all compatible.

 

[hoichi]

Not at all; as has been said time and again, there are good and bad schools for hearing kids, just as there are good and bad schools for the deaf kids. What you describe is the dream sequence of all schools whether they are schools for the deaf or a school for the kids who can hear. The question you should be asking is: if these kids has received or is receiving such a great education that gave or gives the kid a variety of options, to be well rounded educationally and socially, then why is the unemployment rate of the deaf at 50% in the U.S.? Something is being done wrong and needs to be fixed.

who here has ever stated the education Deaf get is great? that is one of the fundamental plms. we dont control Deaf education, Deaf education essentially was constructed to de-educate Deaf, once oralism began to dominate thats exactly what occurred for generations...of course you dont know, because you do not know our history..
indeed something is being done wrong..
who do you think controls Deaf education and Deaf schools? sets the policy and curriculum, the goals and agenda?
your not even a part of our community or our culture. yet you seem to know exactly whats wrong and all the damn answers...
heres a hint....
why not get to know us first before you start tossing around your know it all answers to our our plms..

N
Children attending public schools in the U.S. have not been tracked since the inclusion of Title VI in 1964, which basically outlawed it because it was discriminatory. There are those in education that say that was the last time education actually worked in the U.S., in other countries that still track kids, they end up sending kids out into the world prepared to make a living based on their abilities based on test scores that led them down the business, industrial or academic track. Today every kid in public schools are required to basically do the same or similar corse loads in order the graduate; basically the people in education have said every kid is capable of being a rocket scientist and unfortunately, that is not the case.

alright and who again controls the education system?
shouldn't you be wagging your bigoted finger of disdain at them?

 

[hoichi]

You appear quite defensive, an overreaction I fear.

why not argue against my ideas. engage my ideas..

We are all different and have our own needs, preferences and decisions to make regarding how we communicate.

no one has ever stated otherwise in this thread. ever!

The topic asked a question, it should be stated if you don't want non-signers to offer a view.

i want non signers to offer their view of what they know about. and everyone here does. no one has claimed otherwise. i wont stand around and see utter bullshit stated about my language and not engage you where it counts. since you don't sign, certainly you are NOT fluent, and know very little, you shouldn't be offering an opinion that is factually incorrect. about a language you admittingly know rather little about.

your deaf not Deaf there is a very real difference.
your NOT one of us, your opinion doesnt touch the issues you seem to think you have some secret understanding off. when in reality you know squat about our language.. i corrected you on your factual errors in regards to your understanding of our language. a language you admit to not knowing much off, clearly..

I'm quite prepared to be made more aware, but I could suggest you don't respond with an attack and told to go away as a means of doing it.

i havnt attacked you. just your incorrect statements re our language. and if i posted nonsense about mandarin chinsese and someone who is fluent in mandarin corrects me i should thank him for the favour. not complain that he corrected my false view on it.

It would deter others you want to raise awareness with. 47 years as a deaf person doesn't count here either unless you sign ?

no one has stated that either. your opinion like all opinions count. they stop counting for something when it becomes clear you know little of the topic your offering the opinion about. which is Sign language, in this case ASL. . heres another example that might help you get it.

i dont know Russian. i had an ex from their once, and she taught me a few rude words..but i dont know russian. i can go to a russian board and state all sorts of crazy ideas of mine about Russian the actual language how it works and so on so forth...and those fluent in Russian will obviously see that my ideas about their language, a language i admit i know nothing about is wrong. and some will try to engage me and show me why im wrong. no different here.

and consternation if you suggest well, it didn't work for me. .

it never worked for you because you never learned the language. russian doesnt much work for me either. do you want to hazard a guess why? go on...take a guess...

How effectively you communicate depends on academics and background, mine was different to yours, so different strokes for different blokes.

yes indeed and in order to gain fluency in ANY language one has to USE that language repeatedly with native users....again and again and again and again and again and again...
if you have some other way to fluency by all means let me know...

I Know many deaf who sign, and many who don't sign at all, it's life.

no kiddin

I don't think the capitalization of 'D' helps anyone at all, least of all deaf who don't sign, just indicates division.

its not up to you, to state anything at all on what WE Deaf do with OUR language and OUR culture. your not Deaf..the division is real not just a capital letter. the capital letter we use to denote that we SIGN. ie we use OUR language, which is of course a fundamental part of OUR culture....WE have OUR history, OUR stories, OUR poetry, OUR jokes, all in OUR language. we engage and view the world through the prism of OUR language. WE communicate with each other every damn day in OUR language which is Sign....that is what the D means. it means we SIGN. it really is that simple. the simple fact you cant get it only demonstrates to us really why we need it. ASL is our language. the D means we are signers. and are culturally Deaf.

Like most who are deaf I have many issues to address without pandering to an ID crisis as well. I wish you well, but I don't think we are at all compatible.

that's good for you, enjoy, and us Deaf who use OUR language which you clearly don't know, ..we dont care what you do. if you want to move your beak like a hearie parrot cool.

leave us alone.

 

[seb]

who here has ever stated the education Deaf get is great? that is one of the fundamental plms. we dont control Deaf education, Deaf education essentially was constructed to de-educate Deaf, once oralism began to dominate thats exactly what occurred for generations...of course you dont know, because you do not know our history..
indeed something is being done wrong..
who do you think controls Deaf education and Deaf schools? sets the policy and curriculum, the goals and agenda?
your not even a part of our community or our culture. yet you seem to know exactly whats wrong and all the damn answers...
heres a hint....
why not get to know us first before you start tossing around your know it all answers to our our plms..





alright and who again controls the education system?
shouldn't you be wagging your bigoted finger of disdain at them?

Okay, I guess I can lead the horse to water, but I can't make him drink! What I've been alluding to without success is; the Deaf community who has received a sub par education should be bringing lawsuits against these schools, states, provinces, etc. to get compensation for the crappy education you received. One can't do it alone, but bunch all the Deaf together and you might have some success.

 

[seb]

alright and who again controls the education system?
shouldn't you be wagging your bigoted finger of disdain at them?

This was court mandated under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, so in this case it is the United States Government.

 

[seb]

Oh really, I think it is Rehabilitation Act of 1973 that allow deaf children to be served in hearing school instead of deaf school, not Title VI of 1964, also we have IDEA for K-12 too.

My response was solely related to not being able to track students based on educational test scores and then basing their educational curriculum on either an academic, business or industrial tracks. This was basically outlawed in the US after the passage of Title VI in 1964, and the court case that followed.