Is it ever ok for kids NOT to use ASL?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jiro said:
I see. but as said by many - ASL was their first language and Oral was their 2nd which was acquired later on. Looks like they are doing just fine... and right.
Click to expand...

No, the majority of CI users don't use ASL. The 3 years is an auditory only time table.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Sometimes stereotypes come from somewhere.....the truth hurts.

Are YOU a typical parent, Jillio? I am guessing not.

Just because it can happen doesnt mean it usually does. Same concept applies for oralism. Sometimes it works, doesnt mean it usually does.
Click to expand...

I'd say I'm pretty typical. And I'd say his performance is pretty typical. At least, when compared to the students he went to school with. I saw deaf kids accomplish the same things he accomplished on a daily basis there. And, they all had at least one parent that signed fluently. Most had hearing sibs that did as well.

It is not the fault of ASL that it doesn't usually happen. It is the inconsistencies in use. That certainly has nothing to do with the language.
 
faire_jour said:
ScienceDirect - International Congress Series : Educational intervention and outcomes of early cochlear implantation

"Principal components analysis was used to create composite factor scores for each outcome. Children who consistently used oral communication exhibited a significant advantage over those who used total communication in all outcomes. Outcomes that were affected by pre-implant and early educational placements included speech perception and oral language. Speech production and reading outcomes were not predicted by educational placement until 2 or more years following cochlear implantation and may reflect cochlear implant benefits. Results indicate that communication mode both affects and reflects outcomes of cochlear implantation"
Click to expand...

interesting but possibly misleading. That's just an abstract. Gotta read the whole detail including factors, variables, circumstances, etc. before coming to conclusion. However - methinks this "finding" is funded by CI company. I prefer if the paper is published from well-known medical community.
 
faire_jour said:
No, the majority of CI users don't use ASL. The 3 years is an auditory only time table.
Click to expand...


Where do you get this stuff? From the CI Circle and a some parent that hasn't ventured outside their own little world?
 
faire_jour said:
ScienceDirect - International Congress Series : Educational intervention and outcomes of early cochlear implantation

"Principal components analysis was used to create composite factor scores for each outcome. Children who consistently used oral communication exhibited a significant advantage over those who used total communication in all outcomes. Outcomes that were affected by pre-implant and early educational placements included speech perception and oral language. Speech production and reading outcomes were not predicted by educational placement until 2 or more years following cochlear implantation and may reflect cochlear implant benefits. Results indicate that communication mode both affects and reflects outcomes of cochlear implantation"

Advances in the Spoken Language ... - Google Book Search
Click to expand...

You are googling and coming up with abstracts. Results cannot be evaluated through an abstract. Trying to support your claims this way is not going to work. You need to actually read the research, Faire_jour, not just google up an abstract.
 
jillio said:
Where do you get this stuff? From the CI Circle and a some parent that hasn't ventured outside their own little world?
Click to expand...

More than half are under 18, and we all know that 90% of deaf children are in an oral or mainstream setting. Also, a large portion are post lingually deafen adults. That would mean a very small portion are like my daughter.
 
Jiro said:
interesting but possibly misleading. That's just an abstract. Gotta read the whole detail including factors, variables, circumstances, etc. before coming to conclusion. However - methinks this "finding" is funded by CI company. I prefer if the paper is published from well-known medical community.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
jillio said:
You are googling and coming up with abstracts. Results cannot be evaluated through an abstract. Trying to support your claims this way is not going to work. You need to actually read the research, Faire_jour, not just google up an abstract.
Click to expand...

The second link is to the inside of a book. It has the numbers you need.
 
faire_jour said:
More than half are under 18, and we all know that 90% of deaf children are in an oral or mainstream setting. Also, a large portion are post lingually deafen adults. That would mean a very small portion are like my daughter.
Click to expand...

What point are you trying to make?
 
jillio said:
I'd say I'm pretty typical. And I'd say his performance is pretty typical. At least, when compared to the students he went to school with. I saw deaf kids accomplish the same things he accomplished on a daily basis there. And, they all had at least one parent that signed fluently. Most had hearing sibs that did as well.

It is not the fault of ASL that it doesn't usually happen. It is the inconsistencies in use. That certainly has nothing to do with the language.
Click to expand...

Okay.. first you said a lot of parents of deaf children don't even bother knowing ASL. And now you're saying that you're a typical parent knowing sign fluently....

In your experience... parents of deaf children, do MOST of them know ASL or not?
 
Daredevel7 said:
Okay.. first you said a lot of parents of deaf children don't even bother knowing ASL. And now you're saying that you're a typical parent knowing sign fluently....

In your experience... parents of deaf children, do MOST of them know ASL or not?
Click to expand...

I've heard the number is less than 10%.
 
faire_jour said:
More than half are under 18, and we all know that 90% of deaf children are in an oral or mainstream setting. Also, a large portion are post lingually deafen adults. That would mean a very small portion are like my daughter.
Click to expand...

faire_jour said:
I've heard the number is less than 10%.
Click to expand...

pityfool.gif
where are you getting those figures??
 
Thus, there was a significant difference between the hearing children and the children with Cls on the AMP-E scores (p < .001). The mean AMP-E score of then congenitally deaf children (3.9) was significantly lower than the mean score of the prelingually deaf children (4.7; p= .01). The peak scoring differences between the CI students and the normal-hearing children
in elementary school were seen in questions on communication breakdown, engagement in group discussion, and displaying turn-taking abilities or
a leadership role.
Damen et al. (2006). Cochlear implanls in mainstream education. Annals of Otology, Laryngology, & Rhinology. 115(7):542-552.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Okay.. first you said a lot of parents of deaf children don't even bother knowing ASL. And now you're saying that you're a typical parent knowing sign fluently....

In your experience... parents of deaf children, do MOST of them know ASL or not?
Click to expand...

The majority of hearing parents do not learn sign in any form. That does not make the ones who do atypical parents, as there are still a significant number of us.
 
jillio said:
Thus, there was a significant difference between the hearing children and the children with Cls on the AMP-E scores (p < .001). The mean AMP-E score of then congenitally deaf children (3.9) was significantly lower than the mean score of the prelingually deaf children (4.7; p= .01). The peak scoring differences between the CI students and the normal-hearing children
in elementary school were seen in questions on communication breakdown, engagement in group discussion, and displaying turn-taking abilities or
a leadership role.
Damen et al. (2006). Cochlear implanls in mainstream education. Annals of Otology, Laryngology, & Rhinology. 115(7):542-552.
Click to expand...

:scratch: so.... in english.......
 
faire_jour said:
The second link is to the inside of a book. It has the numbers you need.
Click to expand...

A book you have never read. Really, faire_jour, if you are going to attempt to use research to support your points, you need to have at least read what you are using. If you haven't, you have no idea whether it truly supports your point or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top