Has anyone read this new study?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Exactly. They added those parent interviews to the study, but they didn't do observation on their parents. How fluent are their parents?

My old regular terp from the church in North Dallas is a schoolteacher. Believe it or not, she is a level 3 cert. terp. She doesn't believe in ASL. Her belief is that all deaf children at schools should be taught with SEE because of the reading and writing skills. That's what she does at her school.
That kind of terp situation is common, although less so as time goes by and states start endorsing stronger ASL standards. I know several terps with that same SEE bias. They consider ASL a "look-down-the-nose" version of signing. SEE for the classroom, ASL for the playground, they believe. They end up with confused students whose hearing parents are told that they are learning ASL but they are not. Very rarely does a "mainstreamed" deaf student have any ASL Deaf adults language models in real life.
 
That kind of terp situation is common, although less so as time goes by and states start endorsing stronger ASL standards. I know several terps with that same SEE bias. They consider ASL a "look-down-the-nose" version of signing. SEE for the classroom, ASL for the playground, they believe. They end up with confused students whose hearing parents are told that they are learning ASL but they are not. Very rarely does a "mainstreamed" deaf student have any ASL Deaf adults language models in real life.

The grammar for spoken/written English and ASL is soooo different that I am wondering what you suggest as the method to get the kids to truly understand the difference and when to use what sentence structure?
 
The grammar for spoken/written English and ASL is soooo different that I am wondering what you suggest as the method to get the kids to truly understand the difference and when to use what sentence structure?
I'm not a language instructor so I don't have an expert answer for that. I do know that plenty of people who grow up bilingual or multilingual seem to manage quite well with going back and forth between languages that have different sentence structures. One factor for success is to not make one language "El Supremo" and expect all other languages to kowtow to that language's mold.
 
The grammar for spoken/written English and ASL is soooo different that I am wondering what you suggest as the method to get the kids to truly understand the difference and when to use what sentence structure?
The same thing can be said about different spoken languages as to the grammar. Kids' brains are sponges. They'll pick up and learn each one with ease and can switch back and forth with no trouble.
 
English and ASL are so different, but is it not apparent I can adapt between both and still have correct structure? I know the majority of posters here have never met me, but a few have.
 
That kind of terp situation is common, although less so as time goes by and states start endorsing stronger ASL standards. I know several terps with that same SEE bias. They consider ASL a "look-down-the-nose" version of signing. SEE for the classroom, ASL for the playground, they believe. They end up with confused students whose hearing parents are told that they are learning ASL but they are not. Very rarely does a "mainstreamed" deaf student have any ASL Deaf adults language models in real life.

Yes, unfortunately. My old terp does SEE when she teaches kids to read a book. If hearing parents are strongly encouraged to sign up for ASL class, it would make a great impact on their child's life. If they do, they would know the difference between SEE and ASL. In the study, I'd love to know how many kids are exposed to ASL only. I am trying to find it. Sorry, I'm sleep-deprived. All I read is they are exposed to 'sign language'. They kept using the phrase, sign language, which is unclear. SEE? Total Communication? Baby sign language? I give up.
 
English and ASL are so different, but is it not apparent I can adapt between both and still have correct structure? I know the majority of posters here have never met me, but a few have.

I have never met you but I do believe you.
 
Yes, unfortunately. My old terp does SEE when she teaches kids to read a book. If hearing parents are strongly encouraged to sign up for ASL class, it would make a great impact on their child's life. If they do, they would know the difference between SEE and ASL. In the study, I'd love to know how many kids are exposed to ASL only. I am trying to find it. Sorry, I'm sleep-deprived. All I read is they are exposed to 'sign language'. They kept using the phrase, sign language, which is unclear. SEE? Total Communication? Baby sign language? I give up.
The sign languages used were: "ASL, Total/Simultaneous Communication, baby sign, Signing Exact English, Signed English, sign language, sign support, or Pidgin sign." "A child was classified as positive for sign language exposure at that rating period if one of the following systems was reported by a parent as used at least 10% of the time at home and/or in the child’s intervention program."
 
The same thing can be said about different spoken languages as to the grammar. Kids' brains are sponges. They'll pick up and learn each one with ease and can switch back and forth with no trouble.
As a former teacher(Industrial Arts) I can tell you that every kid is different and every kid learns at a different rate and some will not get the concept you are trying to teach. Think of a bell curve and the kids will basically fall into it. 2.5% will be your sponges and will get everything or fall into the"A" range, 13.5% will get most of what you teach and fall into the "B" range, 68% will get some of what you teach and fall into the "C" range, 13.5% will struggle to grasp the concepts and fall into the "D" range and 2.5% will not get it at all and fall into the "Franklin" range. So not every kid will "Pick it up and learn each one with ease." As to English and grammar girls will on average do much better than boys.
 
Last edited:
The grammar for spoken/written English and ASL is soooo different that I am wondering what you suggest as the method to get the kids to truly understand the difference and when to use what sentence structure?

English and ASL are so different, but is it not apparent I can adapt between both and still have correct structure? I know the majority of posters here have never met me, but a few have.

Please re-read what I wrote. I was not questioning that people can get it but wondering about the best way for the most people to get there.
 
Some good points.... caption provided in video.

How about 3:20 mark in the video a good suggestion?

 
Please re-read what I wrote. I was not questioning that people can get it but wondering about the best way for the most people to get there.

See post 243 and 244.
 
This site actually shows a post counter in each thread? If it does it doesn't show on my computer.

It is down on the same line as the "Like", "+Quote" and "Reply" buttons. It is light colored and just to left of them.
 
Some good points.... caption provided in video.

How about 3:20 mark in the video a good suggestion?

But what exactly constitutes success in the English language in this studies? fluency or ?
 
It is down on the same line as the "Like", "+Quote" and "Reply" buttons. It is light colored and just to left of them.
Thank you. On my computer the type is so faint where the number is that you really have to look and look at it to see the numbers. The post date is also very faint.
 
Thank you. On my computer the type is so faint where the number is that you really have to look and look at it to see the numbers. The post date is also very faint.

I am surprised that we have not gotten a real outcry from those with vision problems; but maybe these are so faint that they don't know they are there!
 
I am surprised that we have not gotten a real outcry from those with vision problems; but maybe these are so faint that they don't know they are there!
I may be nearsighted, but with glasses my vision is better than 20/20! The numbers on my screen almost blend in with the light blueish background.
 
Well, look, the Daily Moth is discussing this article

https://www.*********.com/single-post/2017/06/28/The-Daily-Moth-6-28-17

...And a neuroscientist and other researchers are coming to much the same conclusions I did:

http://pediatrics.aappublications.o...or-a-flawed-study-is-harmful-to-deaf-children

Quoting from Peter C. Hauser, Ph.D. (bold added by me):

Like White and Cooper, we also agree with parents and pediatricians that ensuring each child’s optimal physical, emotional, and social development is important. However, we strongly disagree with their conclusion that “for hearing parents of deaf infants who have chosen cochlear implants, [Geers et al.] findings suggest that learning a sign language should be an option rather than an imperative.” Within one week of publication, 14 physicians, pediatricians, psychologists, and linguists wrote five separate responses, pointing out that the very study White and Cooper praise is marked with methodological flaws and unjustified claims[1,2,3,4,5]. As deaf scientists, we fear that the results would be accepted as appropriate evidence to support claims that deaf children do not need to learn sign language, further increasing the real risk of impoverished language and cognitive development.

First, Geers et al. failed to distinguish between a natural, human signed language (here, American Sign Language, ASL) and artificial, invented systems to visually convey English. Grouping children together who use any visual form of communication under the umbrella of “sign language” makes it impossible to demonstrate the known benefits of learning ASL[1]. Secondly, additional factors that weaken Geers et al.’s findings include that signing children’s auditory perception abilities were much lower than that of other children[4], and that maternal education and income were not controlled[2, 4].

Consequently, Geers et al. failed to distinguish whether ASL impeded, facilitated, or had no impact on spoken English development. Yet, Geers et al. and White and Cooper clearly favor the hypothesis that ASL impedes English development but it is neither the only nor the best interpretation of the data[3]. Their interpretations are based on correlational analyses, yet they suggest causal relations which their own methodology failed to establish[5]. Their results have no bearing on whether exposure to a natural sign language has deleterious effects on deaf children’s cognitive, language, and socio-emotional outcomes, but they are dangerously framed and misinterpreted as such[1].

We and others offer a more plausible conclusion: the continued use of some form of visual communication is the consequence of limited spoken language progress, not the cause. Families who chose to continue using visual communication with their deaf child may have done so precisely because cochlear implants did not deliver the expected auditory benefits and/or spoken language communication was difficult[2]. It is likely that these very same children were suffering from long-term effects of early language deprivation, as evidenced by their poorer language and reading scores.

Geers et al.’s conclusions contribute to long-standing biases, resistance, and misperceptions against natural sign languages in clinical recommendations for deaf children[1]. The unsupported claims further complicate what White and Cooper wrongly describe as the acrimonious “debates between advocates of signing and non-signing.” In truth, we and others advocate for deaf children to receive the robust cognitive, language, and reading benefits afforded by more, not less, language--a scientific finding unfortunately obscured by the present study and accompanying commentary[2,5].

Peter C. Hauser, Ph.D.
Clinical Neuropsychologist, Professor
Director, NTID Center on Cognition and Language
National Technical Institute for the Deaf
Rochester Institute of Technology

Geo Kartheiser
Doctoral Candidate
Ph.D. in Educational Neuroscience (PEN) Program
Gallaudet University

Adam Stone, Ph.D.
Educational Neuroscientist
Ph.D. in Educational Neuroscience (PEN) Program
Gallaudet University

1. Caselli, N. K., Hall, W. C., & Lillo-Martin, D. (19 June 2017) Operationalization and measurement of sign language. [Online comment to Geers et al. (2017), Pediatrics, 140(1):e20163489]. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/06/08/peds.2016...

2. Dye, M. W., Kushalnagar, P., & Henner, J. (19 June 2017). Concerns with data analysis and interpretation. [Online comment to Geers et al. (2017), Pediatrics, 140(1):e20163489]. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/06/08/peds.2016...

3. Hall, M. L., Schönström, K., & Spellun, A. (19 June 2017). Failure to distinguish among competing hypotheses. [Online comment to Geers et al. (2017), Pediatrics, 140(1):e20163489]. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/06/08/peds.2016...

4. Martin, A., J., Napoli, D. J., & Smith, S. R. (18 June 2017). Re: Methodological Concerns Suspend Interpretations. [Online comment to Geers et al. (2017), Pediatrics, 140(1):e20163489]. Retrieved from
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/06/08/peds.2016...

5. St. John, R., Clark, T. A., & Nutt, R. C. (18 June 2017). To the editor: Concerns with correlative data. [Online comment to Geers et al. (2017), Pediatrics, 140(1):e20163489]. Retrieved from
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/06/08/peds.2016...

My favorite post. A HECK of a lot of reading was needed, but well worth it.
 
I am surprised that we have not gotten a real outcry from those with vision problems; but maybe these are so faint that they don't know they are there!

I know it's there and Yes in the past I believe I have said something about it. Unfortunately there isn't much we or even Alex can do about it because it is hard coded into the forum theme code. He is still dragging his feet about the dark theme as well. Might be time to drag that thread out again.

I guess a)my monitor & color is very good that the gray does show up well enough b) my screen resolution is lower than most people here and c) I increase the font where ever I can so that does bring it out a little more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top