I need your opinion

M

mlazon

New Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
So here's the skinny...
I'm taking an ASL class and I have to do a research paper. One of the requirements is that I find out how people in the deaf community feel about my topic. So I thought I would come right to the source.


My topic is teaching infants sign language. I'm hoping to teach my new little one and I think that there are all types of advantages. What do you think?

I really appreciate your help!
 
Isn't teaching sign language to little ones supposed to help them improve their language and IQ? I think it's fantastic! :)
 
Absolutely beneficial. Research has shown that even hearing infants who are exposed to sign benefit in language development areas. In addition, an infant can articulate in sign before they are developmentally ready to articulate verbally. Hearing children who are exposed to sign from birth through deaf parents will usually use their first sign prior to hearing children of hearing parents speaking their first word.
 
yeah I think it's suppose to help. I think it's cool because it will help my little one communicate with me early. I would imagine it would be so frustrating for her to not be able to tell me what she's thinking, or what she wants or needs. I want to see the world through her eyes.
 
Alex said:
Isn't teaching sign language to little ones supposed to help them improve their language and IQ? I think it's fantastic! :)
Click to expand...
:werd:

Babies are more physical than verbal. By taking advantage of their first-learned ability, they can learn to communicate before they even talk!
 
My hearing 15 month old son has been signing for the past 4 months (basic signs) and his comprehension is through signing only even though he is around spoken English. It is so cool that he chose to use his expressive and receptive language through ASL. :)
 
I'm in favor of it as long as it isn't that watered-down "baby sign." I never understood the point of that. Parents have to learn the signs to teach their kids either way, so why not teach them real ASL? Sure, an infant may not be able to sign MILK perfectly, but it's perfectly easy to see when they're trying to make that sign, and this way you are stimulating them with real language instead of yet another made-up sign system.
 
Interpretrator said:
I'm in favor of it as long as it isn't that watered-down "baby sign." I never understood the point of that. Parents have to learn the signs to teach their kids either way, so why not teach them real ASL? Sure, an infant may not be able to sign MILK perfectly, but it's perfectly easy to see when they're trying to make that sign, and this way you are stimulating them with real language instead of yet another made-up sign system.
Click to expand...

Yea..many of my students come from home where they use mostly gestures to communicate with their family members.
 
Is your topic "teaching HEARING infants sign language" ? or deaf infants??

Personally I think it is a great thing to teach infants sign language, hearing or deaf.

My problem is, the medical field promotes baby sign for hearing children with hearing adults. However if the child is deaf, the medical proffession says sign language will hinder any chance of a "normal" life.

I just dont understand the medical profession.
 
Cool idea!
I tried to teach my nephew some signs, but as I was the only one signing to him and I didn't see him every day it didn't work well. :(
 
RDC_girl said:
Is your topic "teaching HEARING infants sign language" ? or deaf infants??

Personally I think it is a great thing to teach infants sign language, hearing or deaf.

My problem is, the medical field promotes baby sign for hearing children with hearing adults. However if the child is deaf, the medical proffession says sign language will hinder any chance of a "normal" life.

I just dont understand the medical profession.
Click to expand...

Now THAT's about the stupidest thing I've ever seen! Why, oh WHY do they not think this through?????
 
I sign with voice to my both boys since they were babies... They look our roles and accept what we are... They began sign when they were 6 months old... something like that... "eat" and "drink"... more sign than just eat and drink when they were over one years old.

Now my both sons sign like deafies. They understand everything what deafies talk about.. .no matter either with voice or without voice. I feel comfortable to sign them and accept what they are... they accept what we are...

I don´t beleive to give up everything to learn children´s language only but let children learn our language as the same as I learn their langugae as well.
 
RDC_girl said:
Is your topic "teaching HEARING infants sign language" ? or deaf infants??

Personally I think it is a great thing to teach infants sign language, hearing or deaf.

My problem is, the medical field promotes baby sign for hearing children with hearing adults. However if the child is deaf, the medical proffession says sign language will hinder any chance of a "normal" life.

I just dont understand the medical profession.
Click to expand...

Oh I had thoughts about that. Same thing goes for some parents. Like hearing parents of hearing kids think it is cool to teach their babies sign language but when their babies are deaf it is a whole different story. Why? Deaf babies need sign language more than hearing children.
 
Back
Top