Mother of 7 y/o Deaf girl

Status
Not open for further replies.
zeefour said:
@Teacherofthedeaf "I also never said that children cannot think using ASL. " Yes you did. You said that "without the use of sign language " you teach children to "think, learn, speak, etc." so that they can "be at the level of hearing children". You keep harping on that only speech and listening are ways to be at the intellectual and academic level of hearing children, which you are saying is much higher than Deaf children who don't speak. I went to grad school too (this stupid girl who signs) and I'm sure you learned basic logic. When you are saying all these things you are also attesting to a belief in the converse, in this case, that Deaf children who use sign language instead of speech are NOT competitive with hearing children and who will not be at their academic level. A little school called Gallaudet would think otherwise. You have heard of it right? I mean they only use ASL on campus so you might not have.

As far as research I have provided study after study. You keep countering with "research from our school says". You realize that's not valid right. Your school has a vested interest in proving that forcing Deaf children to speak and "hear" (I bet you believe you can force paraplegics to 'walk' and blind kids to 'see' too, but that's a different point all together) You're also using a small sample group with no control. It's not statistically valid, if anything it's anecdotal evidence... at best.

Here's more evidence, using proper studies, statistics and a wide variety of sources attesting to the validity of the points discussed. (Also to clarify, in all these "sign language" means an actual complete sign language like ASL or BSL NOT signed English, SEE 1, SEE 2 ,etc.)

http://www.deafed.net/publisheddocs/sub/970723e.htm

This is a great document incorporating numerous studies to explain the benefit of sign language as a Deaf child's first language. It also discusses how ASL is considered a real natural language from a linguistic standpoint while SE, SEE 1 and SEE 2 are consciously designed systems and inferior from a language acquisition standpoint.


http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dcal/dcal-news/early-sign-expos

"The study showed that adults who developed sign language skills from birth had better grammatical judgement in BSL. Adults who reported learning BSL from the ages of 2 to 8 years found it harder to acquire the same language skills. The research has highlighted that learning both a sign language and a spoken or written language will be the most beneficial for children to make the most of their linguistic abilities.
A bilingual approach can maximise linguistic and cognitive skills to overcome any delays or difficulties due to deafness. The advantages of early sign language exposure in particular remain clear even with rapid advances in hearing aids and cochlear implants"

aka a bi-bi education that I've been advocating

https://www.researchgate.net/public...e_for_the_deaf_students_in_classroom_learning

"The study showed that sign language is significantly beneficial language instrument for deaf students in classroom learning.

continued...
Click to expand...
You have not, in fact, provided me with any research that says what you claim. The first paper you have linked to is a case study about one oral deaf child being signed a story and whether or not that child understood in ASL or signed English better. The child wasn't even a signed language user.

The second was a survey sent to a few teachers in one school about how benifical sign was in their classrooms. I am 100% sure that sign was benefitical in their classrooms. Why wouldn't it have been?

And our longitudinal data is important. It shows that our students are catching up and staying caught up. That is important because it shows that what we are doing is working.
 
zeefour said:
@Teacherofthedeaf

Continued.,...

Here's a few points with the associated research from another site:

*CHILDREN WHO LEARN SIGN LANGUAGE MAY HAVE MORE BRAIN CAPACITY LATER, LEARN TO SPEAK SOONER, AND DO BETTER ON FUTURE IQ TESTS. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*11-MONTH-OLDS WHO LEARNED SIGN LANGUAGE OUT SCORED NON-SIGNING PEERS IN LANGUAGE ABILITIES, STANDARD IQ TESTS AND VOCABULARY COMPREHENSION TESTS AFTER SECOND GRADE. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*AN ANSWER TO THE COMMENT, “IF HE LEARNS TO SIGN, HE’S NOT GOING TO TALK”:
RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT BABIES WHO LEARN TO COMMUNICATE WITH SIGN LANGUAGE ARE QUICKER TO SPEAK THAN THEIR NON-SIGNING PEERS. SIGNING CREATES A MORE VERBAL ENVIRONMENT, BECAUSE BABIES INITIATE CONVERSATION ABOUT SUBJECTS THAT INTEREST THEM, AND THEIR PARENTS MORE CONSCIOUSLY REPEAT WORDS. EARLIER EXPOSURE TO SUCCESSFUL COMMUNICATION ACTUALLY DRIVES BABIES TO WANT TO SPEAK SOONER. (THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, JULY 3, 2001)

*HEARING BABIES SPEAK THEIR FIRST WORD, ON THE AVERAGE, WHEN THEY’RE 13 MONTHS OLD AND SPEAK TWO- OR THREE- WORD SENTENCES BY THE TIME THEY’RE 20 MONTHS OLD. IN CONTRAST, SOME BABIES CAN START SIGNING WORDS SUCH AS “MORE” AND “MILK” AT 8 MONTHS AND CAN BUILD VOCABULARIES OF DOZENS OF SIGNS WITHIN MONTHS. (THE BLADE – TOLEDO, OHIO, SEPTEMBER 9, 2001)

Here's more on the benefits of early sign language exposure and bilingualism:
"Research has found many advantages to learning sign language, including:
  • Early first language learning helps facilitate, and may even be necessary, for learning a second language later in life.19
  • Early exposed signers have better academic performance compared to late exposed deaf in a variety of areas,33 including better performance on:
    • tests of English syntax25, 33
    • reading tasks5, 32
    • written language tasks31
    • vocabulary26
    • overall academic achievement17, 29
  • Even moderate fluency in ASL benefits English literacy for Deaf children.30
  • Kids who understand more sign language, understand more English.35
  • Kids who produce more sign language, produce more English.35
  • Strong adult signers have better ASL narrative comprehension, and also higher English reading scores.7
  • The experience of “speaking” two languages (like ASL and English) on a regular basis has broad implications for cognitive ability, enhancing executive control functions and protecting the brain across the life span.2, 9, 11
  • Bilingualism may protect against age-related cognitive decline.4 With all else being equal, one study found the age of dementia onset for bilinguals was 4 years later than it was for monolinguals.
Common Concerns – Is it too difficult for young children to learn two languages (English and ASL) at once? Maybe we should just focus on one language to start.
There is a misconceived fear that teaching babies more than one language too early may cause language delays or language confusion or that the child may never be as competent in either of the languages as a monolingual child is in one. In fact, research shows babies know that they are acquiring two distinct languages and are able to learn them without language delay or language confusion. Bilingual babies are able to reach the classic language milestones on a similar timetable as monolingual babies, such as when they say their first word, when they can say their first fifty words, and when they say their first two-word combinations. There are a few differences though. For example, when counting the child’s first fifty words, the tally would come from a total of words produced in both languages. Young children may also show a language preference and use one of their languages more, however, this is not a delay in language learning, it simply shows a preference, which could change over time, and is often related to the child’s primary sociolinguistic group (for example, the language used by peer groups in school, or if one parent is home all day using one language with a baby, it will often be preferred over a second language that is used when the rest of the family is home only at night). It doesn’t make sense to take away any language to focus on just one. Early exposure of both languages is what is best for the child and will help the child to reach fullest mastery in each of the languages.23

Conclusion
The key to learning language and becoming fluent is early exposure and full access to a natural language.10 Babies are capable of learning any language, and multiple languages, from birth.6, 13Research shows there are many benefits to learning ASL, and the sooner you can start, the better. There are both linguistic and cognitive advantages to being bilingual. Learning both ASL and English from an early age will help the child to reach fluency in both languages. The best time to start learning language is now.
Sources:
  1. Bavelier, D., Newport, E.L., & Supalla, T. (2003, January 01). Children Need Natural Languages, Signed or Spoken. The Dana Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/Default.aspx?id=39306
  2. Bialystok, E., & Craik, F.I.M. (2010). Cognitive and Linguistic Processing in the Bilingual Mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(1), 19-23.
  3. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., & Freedman, M. (2007). Bilingualism as a protection against the onset of symptoms of dementia. Neuropsychologia, 45, 459-464.
  4. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290-303.
  5. Brasel, K. & Quigley, S. (1977, March). Influence of Certain Language and Communication Environments in Early Childhood on the Development of Language in Deaf Individuals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 20, 95-107.
  6. Brentari, D. (Ed.). (2010). Sign languages. Cambridge University Press.
  7. Chamberlain, C., & Mayberry, R. (2008, July 1). American Sign Language syntactic and narrative comprehension in skilled and less skilled readers: Bilingual and bimodal evidence for the linguistic basis of reading. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29(3), 367-388.
  8. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Why sign with deaf babies? [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  9. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Bilingualism: Unimodal and Bimodal [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  10. Davidson, L.S., Geers, A.E., & Nicholas, J.G. (2014, July). The effects of audibility and novel word learning ability on vocabulary level in children with cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int., 15(4), 211-221.

    continued....
Click to expand...
Thank you for these citations, I will read each one and respond individually. I will start out by saying that #2, #3, and #4 have nothing to do with Deaf education so I will skip them.
 
zeefour said:
@Teacherofthedeaf

continued....


11. De Houwer, A. (2009). An introduction to bilingual development. Tonawanda, New York: Multilingual Matters.
12. Deaf Education: A new philosophy. Research findings at NTID. Retrieved 10-10-2016 from https://www.rit.edu/showcase/index.php?id=86
Krentz, U.C., & Corina, D.P. (2008, January). Preference for language in early infancy: the human language bias is not speech specific. Developmental Science, 11(1), 1-9.
13. Kuhl, P. (2010, October). Patricia Kuhl: The linguistic genius of babies [Video file]. TED. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/patricia_kuhl_the_linguistic_genius_of_babies
14. Lenneberg, E.H. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
15. Mayberry, R.I. (2010). Early language acquisition and adult language ability: What sign language reveals about the critical period for language. 16.In Marschark, M. & P.E. Spencer (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education Volume 2 (pp. 281-291). New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Meadow, K. (1966). The effects of early manual communication and family climate on the deaf child’s early development. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
18. Mitchell, R.E., & Karchmer, M.A. (2004, Winter). Chasing the Mythical Ten Percent: Parental Hearing Status of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in the United States. Sign Language Studies, 4(2), 138-163.
19. Morford, J.P., & Mayberry, R.I. (2000). A reexamination of “Early Exposure” and its implications for language acquisition by eye. In Chamberlain, 20.C., Morford, J.P., & R.I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 110-127). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Morgan, G. & Kegl, J. (2006, August). Nicaraguan Sign Language and Theory of Mind: the issue of critical periods and abilities. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(8), 811-819.
21. Newport, E. L., & Supalla, T. (1980). The structuring of language: Clues from the acquisition of signed and spoken language. Signed and spoken language: Biological constraints on linguistic form. Weinheim/Deerfield Beach, FL/Basel: Dahlem Konferenzen. Verlag Chemie.
22. Orfanidou, E., Adam, R., Morgan, G., & McQueen, J. M. (2010). Recognition of signed and spoken language: Different sensory inputs, the same segmentation procedure. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(3), 272-283.
23. Petitto, L. A., & Holowka, S. (2002). Evaluating attributions of delay and confusion in young bilinguals: Special insights from infants acquiring a signed and a spoken language. Sign Language Studies, 3(1), 4-33.
24. Pinker, S. (2003, February). Steven Pinker: Human Nature and the blank slate [Video file]. TED. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_chalks_it_up_to_the_blank_slate
25. Quigley, S. P., Montanelli, D. S., & Wilbur, R. B. (1976). Some aspects of the verb system in the language of deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 19 (3), 536-550.
26. Quigley, S. P., & Frisina, D. R. (1961). Institutionalization and psycho-educational development of deaf children. Council for Exceptional Children.
27. Schick, B., de Villiers, J., de Villiers, P., & Hoffmeister, B. (2002). Theory of mind: Language and cognition in deaf children. The ASHA Leader, 22, 6-7.
28. Singleton, J. L., & Newport, E. L. (2004). When learners surpass their models: The acquisition of American Sign Language from inconsistent input. Cognitive psychology, 49(4), 370-407.
29. Stevenson, E. (1964). A study of the educational achievement of deaf children of deaf parents. California News, 80(14.3).
Strong, M., & Prinz, P. M. (1997). A study of the relationship between American Sign Language and English literacy. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 2(1), 37-46.
30. Stuckless, E. R., & Birch, J. W. (1966). The influence of early manual communication on the linguistic development of deaf children: I. American Annals of the Deaf.
31. Vernon, M., & Koh, S. (1970). Early manual communication and deaf children's achievement. American Annals of the Deaf, 115(5), 527-36.
32. Wilbur, R. B. (2000). The use of ASL to support the development of English and literacy. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 5(1), 81-104.
33. Woolfe, T., Want, S. C., & Siegal, M. (2002). Signposts to development: Theory of mind in deaf children. Child development, 73(3), 768-778.
34. Woolfe, T., Herman, R., Roy, P., & Woll, B. (2010). Early vocabulary development in deaf native signers: A British Sign Language adaptation of the communicative development inventories. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(3), 322-331.



All this shows that bilingualism is the best for Deaf children. Their English literacy (written, read and if they want spoken/"heard" for HoH children with amplification) is higher when accompanied by bilingualism. So even if you're advocating for English use by Deaf students, bilingualism is the best way to accomplish this. Forcing oralism and only English stunts later literacy levels. You use anecdotal evidence of successful Deaf... actually deaf because you strip their association with Deaf culture from them without their consent at an early age, from your forced oralism are just that anecdotal. I was in elementary school in the early 90s and as a HoH student with amplification was subjected to such methods.

You could say I was successful. I went on scholarship to an Ivy League school, I have 3 bachelors, I started law school on an academic scholarship, was accepted to 2 grad schools and I'm currently planning on applying to Gallaudet for my masters in a year. However I know I was successful IN SPITE of the methods I had to use in school, NOT BECAUSE of them . A lot of Deaf/HoH students I know feel the same.

I'm curious if you ever really talk to Deaf adults about their educational experiences and actually listen (since you're so big on that). You seem to disregard actual Deaf people and Deaf culture. If you've done so much schooling for Deaf ed why haven't you learned ANY sign language? It's so hypocritical that you demand D/deaf children learn to talk and hear your language but you refuse to learn our language. ou also haven't answered my question of when and where you were in school. Your methods are pretty outdated, oralism is dying for a reason. Bilingualism still incorporates English language fluency, so I don't know why you're so opposed to this clearly successful method that allows Deaf children to CHOOSE later in life, they can stay in the hearing world, using English fluently, or they can be in the Deaf world fluent in ASL, or they can be active in both. I have a hard time being fully active in the Deaf community because I wasn't exposed to proper ASL as a child I used cued speech, SE and English like your students.
Click to expand...
#11, #13, #14, and #24 are not about deaf children either. I cannot say if these citations "show that bilingualism is the best for Deaf children", but I will spend some time reading them and will respond. I have been in the field for a number of years and I have yet to see a single piece of research that compares the literacy of children who use ASL and the literacy of children who use spoken language and have the children who use ASL reach age appropriate reading levels and those with spoken language not. I *have* seen them compare children who are early signers and those who start signing late, and of course, those who have language early outperform those who do not. That is not the comparision we are discussing.
 
zeefour said:
@Teacherofthedeaf

continued....


11. De Houwer, A. (2009). An introduction to bilingual development. Tonawanda, New York: Multilingual Matters.
12. Deaf Education: A new philosophy. Research findings at NTID. Retrieved 10-10-2016 from https://www.rit.edu/showcase/index.php?id=86
Krentz, U.C., & Corina, D.P. (2008, January). Preference for language in early infancy: the human language bias is not speech specific. Developmental Science, 11(1), 1-9.
13. Kuhl, P. (2010, October). Patricia Kuhl: The linguistic genius of babies [Video file]. TED. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/patricia_kuhl_the_linguistic_genius_of_babies
14. Lenneberg, E.H. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
15. Mayberry, R.I. (2010). Early language acquisition and adult language ability: What sign language reveals about the critical period for language. 16.In Marschark, M. & P.E. Spencer (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education Volume 2 (pp. 281-291). New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Meadow, K. (1966). The effects of early manual communication and family climate on the deaf child’s early development. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
18. Mitchell, R.E., & Karchmer, M.A. (2004, Winter). Chasing the Mythical Ten Percent: Parental Hearing Status of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in the United States. Sign Language Studies, 4(2), 138-163.
19. Morford, J.P., & Mayberry, R.I. (2000). A reexamination of “Early Exposure” and its implications for language acquisition by eye. In Chamberlain, 20.C., Morford, J.P., & R.I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 110-127). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Morgan, G. & Kegl, J. (2006, August). Nicaraguan Sign Language and Theory of Mind: the issue of critical periods and abilities. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(8), 811-819.
21. Newport, E. L., & Supalla, T. (1980). The structuring of language: Clues from the acquisition of signed and spoken language. Signed and spoken language: Biological constraints on linguistic form. Weinheim/Deerfield Beach, FL/Basel: Dahlem Konferenzen. Verlag Chemie.
22. Orfanidou, E., Adam, R., Morgan, G., & McQueen, J. M. (2010). Recognition of signed and spoken language: Different sensory inputs, the same segmentation procedure. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(3), 272-283.
23. Petitto, L. A., & Holowka, S. (2002). Evaluating attributions of delay and confusion in young bilinguals: Special insights from infants acquiring a signed and a spoken language. Sign Language Studies, 3(1), 4-33.
24. Pinker, S. (2003, February). Steven Pinker: Human Nature and the blank slate [Video file]. TED. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_chalks_it_up_to_the_blank_slate
25. Quigley, S. P., Montanelli, D. S., & Wilbur, R. B. (1976). Some aspects of the verb system in the language of deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 19 (3), 536-550.
26. Quigley, S. P., & Frisina, D. R. (1961). Institutionalization and psycho-educational development of deaf children. Council for Exceptional Children.
27. Schick, B., de Villiers, J., de Villiers, P., & Hoffmeister, B. (2002). Theory of mind: Language and cognition in deaf children. The ASHA Leader, 22, 6-7.
28. Singleton, J. L., & Newport, E. L. (2004). When learners surpass their models: The acquisition of American Sign Language from inconsistent input. Cognitive psychology, 49(4), 370-407.
29. Stevenson, E. (1964). A study of the educational achievement of deaf children of deaf parents. California News, 80(14.3).
Strong, M., & Prinz, P. M. (1997). A study of the relationship between American Sign Language and English literacy. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 2(1), 37-46.
30. Stuckless, E. R., & Birch, J. W. (1966). The influence of early manual communication on the linguistic development of deaf children: I. American Annals of the Deaf.
31. Vernon, M., & Koh, S. (1970). Early manual communication and deaf children's achievement. American Annals of the Deaf, 115(5), 527-36.
32. Wilbur, R. B. (2000). The use of ASL to support the development of English and literacy. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 5(1), 81-104.
33. Woolfe, T., Want, S. C., & Siegal, M. (2002). Signposts to development: Theory of mind in deaf children. Child development, 73(3), 768-778.
34. Woolfe, T., Herman, R., Roy, P., & Woll, B. (2010). Early vocabulary development in deaf native signers: A British Sign Language adaptation of the communicative development inventories. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(3), 322-331.



All this shows that bilingualism is the best for Deaf children. Their English literacy (written, read and if they want spoken/"heard" for HoH children with amplification) is higher when accompanied by bilingualism. So even if you're advocating for English use by Deaf students, bilingualism is the best way to accomplish this. Forcing oralism and only English stunts later literacy levels. You use anecdotal evidence of successful Deaf... actually deaf because you strip their association with Deaf culture from them without their consent at an early age, from your forced oralism are just that anecdotal. I was in elementary school in the early 90s and as a HoH student with amplification was subjected to such methods.

You could say I was successful. I went on scholarship to an Ivy League school, I have 3 bachelors, I started law school on an academic scholarship, was accepted to 2 grad schools and I'm currently planning on applying to Gallaudet for my masters in a year. However I know I was successful IN SPITE of the methods I had to use in school, NOT BECAUSE of them . A lot of Deaf/HoH students I know feel the same.

I'm curious if you ever really talk to Deaf adults about their educational experiences and actually listen (since you're so big on that). You seem to disregard actual Deaf people and Deaf culture. If you've done so much schooling for Deaf ed why haven't you learned ANY sign language? It's so hypocritical that you demand D/deaf children learn to talk and hear your language but you refuse to learn our language. ou also haven't answered my question of when and where you were in school. Your methods are pretty outdated, oralism is dying for a reason. Bilingualism still incorporates English language fluency, so I don't know why you're so opposed to this clearly successful method that allows Deaf children to CHOOSE later in life, they can stay in the hearing world, using English fluently, or they can be in the Deaf world fluent in ASL, or they can be active in both. I have a hard time being fully active in the Deaf community because I wasn't exposed to proper ASL as a child I used cued speech, SE and English like your students.
Click to expand...
How exactly do you know that it is inspite of your education?

I have spoken to many Deaf adults. In fact, I currently serve two children who come from Deaf families. They have chosen spoken language (and in one case bilateral cochlear implants) for their child's education.

Did I say that I can't sign ASL? I can. I just don't. That is not my focus. I am providing listening and spoken language services.

Oralism is not dying. Over 85% of children are being educated using listening and spoken language. That is up from around 60% in the early 2000's. The cochlear implant rate in some countries is as high as 95%. The populations in Deaf schools is dwindling (which is not a good thing, there needs to be a continuum of placements available) and the placements in mainstream settings is soaring.
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
#11, #13, #14, and #24 are not about deaf children either. I cannot say if these citations "show that bilingualism is the best for Deaf children", but I will spend some time reading them and will respond. I have been in the field for a number of years and I have yet to see a single piece of research that compares the literacy of children who use ASL and the literacy of children who use spoken language and have the children who use ASL reach age appropriate reading levels and those with spoken language not. I *have* seen them compare children who are early signers and those who start signing late, and of course, those who have language early outperform those who do not. That is not the comparision we are discussing.
Click to expand...

The crux of the issue is linguistic, which is what a number of those papers and research discuss. It's about how ALL children acquire language, through exposure. Hearing children learn their native language (in this case we'll use English) by hearing those around them speak English, read to them i English, etc. A deaf child CANNOT fully and naturally acquire a complete language in this manner because they cannot hear. But they still acquire language by exposure, like hearing children. So the idea is that you then exposure them to a complete natural visual language (in this case we'll use ASL). With ASL exposure a Deaf child can acquire a complete language. With this exposure, their brain's literacy center is activated and then much more capable of acquiring other languages as well as learning all languages L1, L2, etc. at a higher level).

This is true for hearing children who speak a different language and then are ELA students. If their Spanish is continued to be nurtured at a higher level and English is taught as an L2 using Spanish, they'll have much higher rate of success with a much higher level mastery of their L2.

What you're trying to do is fight nature. There's a perfectly valid language that Deaf children can naturally acquire, it's ASL/BSL/etc. If you believe English is of the uptmost importance, Deaf children who were exposed to a full sign language at an early age, they will be able to acquire written and even spoken English much easier and at a much higher level.

However if Deaf children don't have this exposure and instead verbal English and contrived sign systems (not languages) are forced on them, their literacy ability isn't activated at the same level. It takes so much more work and it's so much harder to develop language capability in this manner. This is what you're doing. Even if you're successful as you claim, you'd have just as much and more success in a much smoother more natural way if your Deaf/HoH students had been exposed to their natural native sign language as early as possible and then you used their L1 sign language to teach them written and even spoken English. You'd have to learn ASL but you're the one who's adamant about working with Deaf children. It's like being an ELA teacher with predominately Latino students and not speaking a word of Spanish.

That doesn't even cover the emotional cost of what you're doing. What is the cost of your so called success? How to your students feel as they grow up, not being hearing but not knowing or being exposed to the Deaf community. Listen to a lot of the Deaf/HoH posters here who have had horrible experiences with this oral AVT system. Our emotional and cultural well-being is far more important than scoring well on tests in English.
 
zeefour said:
@Teacherofthedeaf

Continued.,...

Here's a few points with the associated research from another site:

*CHILDREN WHO LEARN SIGN LANGUAGE MAY HAVE MORE BRAIN CAPACITY LATER, LEARN TO SPEAK SOONER, AND DO BETTER ON FUTURE IQ TESTS. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*11-MONTH-OLDS WHO LEARNED SIGN LANGUAGE OUT SCORED NON-SIGNING PEERS IN LANGUAGE ABILITIES, STANDARD IQ TESTS AND VOCABULARY COMPREHENSION TESTS AFTER SECOND GRADE. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*AN ANSWER TO THE COMMENT, “IF HE LEARNS TO SIGN, HE’S NOT GOING TO TALK”:
RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT BABIES WHO LEARN TO COMMUNICATE WITH SIGN LANGUAGE ARE QUICKER TO SPEAK THAN THEIR NON-SIGNING PEERS. SIGNING CREATES A MORE VERBAL ENVIRONMENT, BECAUSE BABIES INITIATE CONVERSATION ABOUT SUBJECTS THAT INTEREST THEM, AND THEIR PARENTS MORE CONSCIOUSLY REPEAT WORDS. EARLIER EXPOSURE TO SUCCESSFUL COMMUNICATION ACTUALLY DRIVES BABIES TO WANT TO SPEAK SOONER. (THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, JULY 3, 2001)

*HEARING BABIES SPEAK THEIR FIRST WORD, ON THE AVERAGE, WHEN THEY’RE 13 MONTHS OLD AND SPEAK TWO- OR THREE- WORD SENTENCES BY THE TIME THEY’RE 20 MONTHS OLD. IN CONTRAST, SOME BABIES CAN START SIGNING WORDS SUCH AS “MORE” AND “MILK” AT 8 MONTHS AND CAN BUILD VOCABULARIES OF DOZENS OF SIGNS WITHIN MONTHS. (THE BLADE – TOLEDO, OHIO, SEPTEMBER 9, 2001)

Here's more on the benefits of early sign language exposure and bilingualism:
"Research has found many advantages to learning sign language, including:
  • Early first language learning helps facilitate, and may even be necessary, for learning a second language later in life.19
  • Early exposed signers have better academic performance compared to late exposed deaf in a variety of areas,33 including better performance on:
    • tests of English syntax25, 33
    • reading tasks5, 32
    • written language tasks31
    • vocabulary26
    • overall academic achievement17, 29
  • Even moderate fluency in ASL benefits English literacy for Deaf children.30
  • Kids who understand more sign language, understand more English.35
  • Kids who produce more sign language, produce more English.35
  • Strong adult signers have better ASL narrative comprehension, and also higher English reading scores.7
  • The experience of “speaking” two languages (like ASL and English) on a regular basis has broad implications for cognitive ability, enhancing executive control functions and protecting the brain across the life span.2, 9, 11
  • Bilingualism may protect against age-related cognitive decline.4 With all else being equal, one study found the age of dementia onset for bilinguals was 4 years later than it was for monolinguals.
Common Concerns – Is it too difficult for young children to learn two languages (English and ASL) at once? Maybe we should just focus on one language to start.
There is a misconceived fear that teaching babies more than one language too early may cause language delays or language confusion or that the child may never be as competent in either of the languages as a monolingual child is in one. In fact, research shows babies know that they are acquiring two distinct languages and are able to learn them without language delay or language confusion. Bilingual babies are able to reach the classic language milestones on a similar timetable as monolingual babies, such as when they say their first word, when they can say their first fifty words, and when they say their first two-word combinations. There are a few differences though. For example, when counting the child’s first fifty words, the tally would come from a total of words produced in both languages. Young children may also show a language preference and use one of their languages more, however, this is not a delay in language learning, it simply shows a preference, which could change over time, and is often related to the child’s primary sociolinguistic group (for example, the language used by peer groups in school, or if one parent is home all day using one language with a baby, it will often be preferred over a second language that is used when the rest of the family is home only at night). It doesn’t make sense to take away any language to focus on just one. Early exposure of both languages is what is best for the child and will help the child to reach fullest mastery in each of the languages.23

Conclusion
The key to learning language and becoming fluent is early exposure and full access to a natural language.10 Babies are capable of learning any language, and multiple languages, from birth.6, 13Research shows there are many benefits to learning ASL, and the sooner you can start, the better. There are both linguistic and cognitive advantages to being bilingual. Learning both ASL and English from an early age will help the child to reach fluency in both languages. The best time to start learning language is now.
Sources:
  1. Bavelier, D., Newport, E.L., & Supalla, T. (2003, January 01). Children Need Natural Languages, Signed or Spoken. The Dana Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/Default.aspx?id=39306
  2. Bialystok, E., & Craik, F.I.M. (2010). Cognitive and Linguistic Processing in the Bilingual Mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(1), 19-23.
  3. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., & Freedman, M. (2007). Bilingualism as a protection against the onset of symptoms of dementia. Neuropsychologia, 45, 459-464.
  4. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290-303.
  5. Brasel, K. & Quigley, S. (1977, March). Influence of Certain Language and Communication Environments in Early Childhood on the Development of Language in Deaf Individuals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 20, 95-107.
  6. Brentari, D. (Ed.). (2010). Sign languages. Cambridge University Press.
  7. Chamberlain, C., & Mayberry, R. (2008, July 1). American Sign Language syntactic and narrative comprehension in skilled and less skilled readers: Bilingual and bimodal evidence for the linguistic basis of reading. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29(3), 367-388.
  8. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Why sign with deaf babies? [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  9. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Bilingualism: Unimodal and Bimodal [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  10. Davidson, L.S., Geers, A.E., & Nicholas, J.G. (2014, July). The effects of audibility and novel word learning ability on vocabulary level in children with cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int., 15(4), 211-221.

    continued....
Click to expand...
#1 is merely talking about the fact that ASL is a full and accessable language. It doesn't compare outcomes at all. It does however have the following statements which are factually incorrect:

The cochlear implant, a device permanently connecting the auditory nerve with the outside ear, turns sound vibrations into weak electrical signals to the brain, bypassing the eardrum. Cochlear implants, however, still cannot make a profoundly deaf child become a native user of oral language. Success of implants, thus far, at least, has been gauged by the ability of children to understand low-level speech sounds (such as the ability to discriminate between a “p” and a “b”), usually not by the children’s ability to comprehend and use full normal speech.

First, the CI doesn't "bypass the eardrum", it bypasses the entire outer, middle and inner ear to provide direct electrical stimulation to the auditory nerve. Second, of course, people are gauging success by their ability to understand and use language. An audiogram means nothing compared to speech and language testing.
 
zeefour said:
The crux of the issue is linguistic, which is what a number of those papers and research discuss. It's about how ALL children acquire language, through exposure. Hearing children learn their native language (in this case we'll use English) by hearing those around them speak English, read to them i English, etc. A deaf child CANNOT fully and naturally acquire a complete language in this manner because they cannot hear. But they still acquire language by exposure, like hearing children. So the idea is that you then exposure them to a complete natural visual language (in this case we'll use ASL). With ASL exposure a Deaf child can acquire a complete language. With this exposure, their brain's literacy center is activated and then much more capable of acquiring other languages as well as learning all languages L1, L2, etc. at a higher level).

This is true for hearing children who speak a different language and then are ELA students. If their Spanish is continued to be nurtured at a higher level and English is taught as an L2 using Spanish, they'll have much higher rate of success with a much higher level mastery of their L2.

What you're trying to do is fight nature. There's a perfectly valid language that Deaf children can naturally acquire, it's ASL/BSL/etc. If you believe English is of the uptmost importance, Deaf children who were exposed to a full sign language at an early age, they will be able to acquire written and even spoken English much easier and at a much higher level.

However if Deaf children don't have this exposure and instead verbal English and contrived sign systems (not languages) are forced on them, their literacy ability isn't activated at the same level. It takes so much more work and it's so much harder to develop language capability in this manner. This is what you're doing. Even if you're successful as you claim, you'd have just as much and more success in a much smoother more natural way if your Deaf/HoH students had been exposed to their natural native sign language as early as possible and then you used their L1 sign language to teach them written and even spoken English. You'd have to learn ASL but you're the one who's adamant about working with Deaf children. It's like being an ELA teacher with predominately Latino students and not speaking a word of Spanish.

That doesn't even cover the emotional cost of what you're doing. What is the cost of your so called success? How to your students feel as they grow up, not being hearing but not knowing or being exposed to the Deaf community. Listen to a lot of the Deaf/HoH posters here who have had horrible experiences with this oral AVT system. Our emotional and cultural well-being is far more important than scoring well on tests in English.
Click to expand...
What you are missing is that while children with hearing loss do not have perfect access, they absolutely do have access to the language being used around them. Through language-rich environments and auditory verbal strategies we are able to provide a child access to naturally developing the spoken language of their home. They are able to understand 90+% using technology and they catch up and stay caught up.

How do they feel?
They talk about it here:
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
How exactly do you know that it is inspite of your education?

I have spoken to many Deaf adults. In fact, I currently serve two children who come from Deaf families. They have chosen spoken language (and in one case bilateral cochlear implants) for their child's education.

Did I say that I can't sign ASL? I can. I just don't. That is not my focus. I am providing listening and spoken language services.

Oralism is not dying. Over 85% of children are being educated using listening and spoken language. That is up from around 60% in the early 2000's. The cochlear implant rate in some countries is as high as 95%. The populations in Deaf schools is dwindling (which is not a good thing, there needs to be a continuum of placements available) and the placements in mainstream settings is soaring.
Click to expand...

You said you don't sign. You said you don't use any sign language at all in your school.

And those mainstreamed students aren't strictly oral. You're misrepresenting stastistics. Most of those students are in TC environments. Speech may be used, but there's also a multitude of sign languages and signing systems.

For example for high school I went to school at my mom's in an inner ring suburb of a large city. We had over 2,000 kids and the high school was the "magnet" school for Deaf/HoH mainstreamed students. There were 3 of us. One girl who became on of my best friends was 2 years older and was profoundly Deaf since birth. They tried HAs but she hated them and stopped using them as a toddler. She used only sign language and had an interprer in all her classes. It was a mix of ASL and signed English. I was in the middle. I have HAs and got a BAHA. I used FM systems and CART predominately. However in elementary school I had an aid who used cued speech and signed English in some classes and special sessions. I also went to speech class. The 3rd boy was my age and had a CI and didn't use any sign language. All 3 of us went to college and started learning proper ASL and became much more involved with the Deaf community. That's just an antedotal point.

However I know in many states this is how most Deaf/HoH students are educated. I know the ECE and Child Find (birth to age 3 in Colorado) are stressing sign language earlier and earlier and there's been a boost of Deaf ASL based charter schools as well as more sign language used in TC mainstreamed environments.
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
What you are missing is that while children with hearing loss do not have perfect access, they absolutely do have access to the language being used around them. Through language-rich environments and auditory verbal strategies we are able to provide a child access to naturally developing the spoken language of their home. They are able to understand 90+% using technology and they catch up and stay caught up.

How do they feel?
They talk about it here:
Click to expand...

It's still not fully accessible. Why would you force a system on a child that they cannot 100% access, especially when there's another just as valid system that IS 100% accessible to them naturally without surgery without intervention. Especially when by using that language they can learn the verbal language as an L2 successfully.

The only reason I can see you tirelessly advocate this system that requires so much more work and pushing and intervention because you don't approve of the system that Deaf children can naturally acquire. Your bias against ASL and anything involving the Deaf community and culture is so obvious. You only thing Deaf children can be valuable and successful if they pretend to be hearing. It's pretty twisted.
 
zeefour said:
You said you don't sign. You said you don't use any sign language at all in your school.

And those mainstreamed students aren't strictly oral. You're misrepresenting stastistics. Most of those students are in TC environments. Speech may be used, but there's also a multitude of sign languages and signing systems.

For example for high school I went to school at my mom's in an inner ring suburb of a large city. We had over 2,000 kids and the high school was the "magnet" school for Deaf/HoH mainstreamed students. There were 3 of us. One girl who became on of my best friends was 2 years older and was profoundly Deaf since birth. They tried HAs but she hated them and stopped using them as a toddler. She used only sign language and had an interprer in all her classes. It was a mix of ASL and signed English. I was in the middle. I have HAs and got a BAHA. I used FM systems and CART predominately. However in elementary school I had an aid who used cued speech and signed English in some classes and special sessions. I also went to speech class. The 3rd boy was my age and had a CI and didn't use any sign language. All 3 of us went to college and started learning proper ASL and became much more involved with the Deaf community. That's just an antedotal point.

However I know in many states this is how most Deaf/HoH students are educated. I know the ECE and Child Find (birth to age 3 in Colorado) are stressing sign language earlier and earlier and there's been a boost of Deaf ASL based charter schools as well as more sign language used in TC mainstreamed environments.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that I don't know ASL, I said that I don't use it.
No, most students are in their neighborhood school. That is a fully listening and spoken language setting. Even magnet schools have fewer classrooms that use any version of sign than those who use spoken language alone. The stats say that less than 5% of kids have ASL as the language of communcation.
 
zeefour said:
It's still not fully accessible. Why would you force a system on a child that they cannot 100% access, especially when there's another just as valid system that IS 100% accessible to them naturally without surgery without intervention. Especially when by using that language they can learn the verbal language as an L2 successfully.

The only reason I can see you tirelessly advocate this system that requires so much more work and pushing and intervention because you don't approve of the system that Deaf children can naturally acquire. Your bias against ASL and anything involving the Deaf community and culture is so obvious. You only thing Deaf children can be valuable and successful if they pretend to be hearing. It's pretty twisted.
Click to expand...
It isn't my choice, it is the family's choice. I provide the best possible services and education for the child after the family has chosen listening and spoken language. You would need to ask the families why they choose spoken language over ASL.
 
zeefour said:
@Teacherofthedeaf

Continued.,...

Here's a few points with the associated research from another site:

*CHILDREN WHO LEARN SIGN LANGUAGE MAY HAVE MORE BRAIN CAPACITY LATER, LEARN TO SPEAK SOONER, AND DO BETTER ON FUTURE IQ TESTS. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*11-MONTH-OLDS WHO LEARNED SIGN LANGUAGE OUT SCORED NON-SIGNING PEERS IN LANGUAGE ABILITIES, STANDARD IQ TESTS AND VOCABULARY COMPREHENSION TESTS AFTER SECOND GRADE. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*AN ANSWER TO THE COMMENT, “IF HE LEARNS TO SIGN, HE’S NOT GOING TO TALK”:
RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT BABIES WHO LEARN TO COMMUNICATE WITH SIGN LANGUAGE ARE QUICKER TO SPEAK THAN THEIR NON-SIGNING PEERS. SIGNING CREATES A MORE VERBAL ENVIRONMENT, BECAUSE BABIES INITIATE CONVERSATION ABOUT SUBJECTS THAT INTEREST THEM, AND THEIR PARENTS MORE CONSCIOUSLY REPEAT WORDS. EARLIER EXPOSURE TO SUCCESSFUL COMMUNICATION ACTUALLY DRIVES BABIES TO WANT TO SPEAK SOONER. (THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, JULY 3, 2001)

*HEARING BABIES SPEAK THEIR FIRST WORD, ON THE AVERAGE, WHEN THEY’RE 13 MONTHS OLD AND SPEAK TWO- OR THREE- WORD SENTENCES BY THE TIME THEY’RE 20 MONTHS OLD. IN CONTRAST, SOME BABIES CAN START SIGNING WORDS SUCH AS “MORE” AND “MILK” AT 8 MONTHS AND CAN BUILD VOCABULARIES OF DOZENS OF SIGNS WITHIN MONTHS. (THE BLADE – TOLEDO, OHIO, SEPTEMBER 9, 2001)

Here's more on the benefits of early sign language exposure and bilingualism:
"Research has found many advantages to learning sign language, including:
  • Early first language learning helps facilitate, and may even be necessary, for learning a second language later in life.19
  • Early exposed signers have better academic performance compared to late exposed deaf in a variety of areas,33 including better performance on:
    • tests of English syntax25, 33
    • reading tasks5, 32
    • written language tasks31
    • vocabulary26
    • overall academic achievement17, 29
  • Even moderate fluency in ASL benefits English literacy for Deaf children.30
  • Kids who understand more sign language, understand more English.35
  • Kids who produce more sign language, produce more English.35
  • Strong adult signers have better ASL narrative comprehension, and also higher English reading scores.7
  • The experience of “speaking” two languages (like ASL and English) on a regular basis has broad implications for cognitive ability, enhancing executive control functions and protecting the brain across the life span.2, 9, 11
  • Bilingualism may protect against age-related cognitive decline.4 With all else being equal, one study found the age of dementia onset for bilinguals was 4 years later than it was for monolinguals.
Common Concerns – Is it too difficult for young children to learn two languages (English and ASL) at once? Maybe we should just focus on one language to start.
There is a misconceived fear that teaching babies more than one language too early may cause language delays or language confusion or that the child may never be as competent in either of the languages as a monolingual child is in one. In fact, research shows babies know that they are acquiring two distinct languages and are able to learn them without language delay or language confusion. Bilingual babies are able to reach the classic language milestones on a similar timetable as monolingual babies, such as when they say their first word, when they can say their first fifty words, and when they say their first two-word combinations. There are a few differences though. For example, when counting the child’s first fifty words, the tally would come from a total of words produced in both languages. Young children may also show a language preference and use one of their languages more, however, this is not a delay in language learning, it simply shows a preference, which could change over time, and is often related to the child’s primary sociolinguistic group (for example, the language used by peer groups in school, or if one parent is home all day using one language with a baby, it will often be preferred over a second language that is used when the rest of the family is home only at night). It doesn’t make sense to take away any language to focus on just one. Early exposure of both languages is what is best for the child and will help the child to reach fullest mastery in each of the languages.23

Conclusion
The key to learning language and becoming fluent is early exposure and full access to a natural language.10 Babies are capable of learning any language, and multiple languages, from birth.6, 13Research shows there are many benefits to learning ASL, and the sooner you can start, the better. There are both linguistic and cognitive advantages to being bilingual. Learning both ASL and English from an early age will help the child to reach fluency in both languages. The best time to start learning language is now.
Sources:
  1. Bavelier, D., Newport, E.L., & Supalla, T. (2003, January 01). Children Need Natural Languages, Signed or Spoken. The Dana Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/Default.aspx?id=39306
  2. Bialystok, E., & Craik, F.I.M. (2010). Cognitive and Linguistic Processing in the Bilingual Mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(1), 19-23.
  3. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., & Freedman, M. (2007). Bilingualism as a protection against the onset of symptoms of dementia. Neuropsychologia, 45, 459-464.
  4. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290-303.
  5. Brasel, K. & Quigley, S. (1977, March). Influence of Certain Language and Communication Environments in Early Childhood on the Development of Language in Deaf Individuals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 20, 95-107.
  6. Brentari, D. (Ed.). (2010). Sign languages. Cambridge University Press.
  7. Chamberlain, C., & Mayberry, R. (2008, July 1). American Sign Language syntactic and narrative comprehension in skilled and less skilled readers: Bilingual and bimodal evidence for the linguistic basis of reading. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29(3), 367-388.
  8. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Why sign with deaf babies? [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  9. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Bilingualism: Unimodal and Bimodal [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  10. Davidson, L.S., Geers, A.E., & Nicholas, J.G. (2014, July). The effects of audibility and novel word learning ability on vocabulary level in children with cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int., 15(4), 211-221.

    continued....
Click to expand...
#4 (I could only get the abstract) says that in 1977 children who used Signed English scored better than those who used spoken language alone on most subtests on the Stanford Acheivement Test. That one would be an argument for SEE, but is pretty outdated at 41 years old.
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
#4 (I could only get the abstract) says that in 1977 children who used Signed English scored better than those who used spoken language alone on most subtests on the Stanford Acheivement Test. That one would be an argument for SEE, but is pretty outdated at 41 years old.
Click to expand...

Signed English is SE. SEE (1) is Signing Essential English and SEE 2 is Seeing Essential English. They have made up signs for -ed -ing etc. endings, contractions. Words like BUTTERFLY are signed BUTTER + FLY for example. SEE 1 and 2 are used less and less these days. SE is just ASL signs in English word order.

Children's brains haven't changed much in 41 years, I'd still say it has some validity. It was one of the first studies that proved the success of using a signed/visual language for Deaf/HoH students.
 
zeefour said:
Signed English is SE. SEE (1) is Signing Essential English and SEE 2 is Seeing Essential English. They have made up signs for -ed -ing etc. endings, contractions. Words like BUTTERFLY are signed BUTTER + FLY for example. SEE 1 and 2 are used less and less these days. SE is just ASL signs in English word order.

Children's brains haven't changed much in 41 years, I'd still say it has some validity. It was one of the first studies that proved the success of using a signed/visual language for Deaf/HoH students.
Click to expand...
And which one did this study use? I couldn't tell from the abstract.

And the thing that has changed in the last 41 years was the amount of access to spoken language children have had and at what age they had it. The children in this study would have had analog hearing aids (if they had any) and would not have been identified before age 3. Our children are identified at birth now, fitted with devices that allow access to all sounds of spoken language and begin intervention by 6 months. We know that even a delay of 6 months is linked to .3 of a standard deviation on language testing. Therefore a full 3 years is dramatic.
 
zeefour said:
@Teacherofthedeaf

Continued.,...

Here's a few points with the associated research from another site:

*CHILDREN WHO LEARN SIGN LANGUAGE MAY HAVE MORE BRAIN CAPACITY LATER, LEARN TO SPEAK SOONER, AND DO BETTER ON FUTURE IQ TESTS. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*11-MONTH-OLDS WHO LEARNED SIGN LANGUAGE OUT SCORED NON-SIGNING PEERS IN LANGUAGE ABILITIES, STANDARD IQ TESTS AND VOCABULARY COMPREHENSION TESTS AFTER SECOND GRADE. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*AN ANSWER TO THE COMMENT, “IF HE LEARNS TO SIGN, HE’S NOT GOING TO TALK”:
RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT BABIES WHO LEARN TO COMMUNICATE WITH SIGN LANGUAGE ARE QUICKER TO SPEAK THAN THEIR NON-SIGNING PEERS. SIGNING CREATES A MORE VERBAL ENVIRONMENT, BECAUSE BABIES INITIATE CONVERSATION ABOUT SUBJECTS THAT INTEREST THEM, AND THEIR PARENTS MORE CONSCIOUSLY REPEAT WORDS. EARLIER EXPOSURE TO SUCCESSFUL COMMUNICATION ACTUALLY DRIVES BABIES TO WANT TO SPEAK SOONER. (THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, JULY 3, 2001)

*HEARING BABIES SPEAK THEIR FIRST WORD, ON THE AVERAGE, WHEN THEY’RE 13 MONTHS OLD AND SPEAK TWO- OR THREE- WORD SENTENCES BY THE TIME THEY’RE 20 MONTHS OLD. IN CONTRAST, SOME BABIES CAN START SIGNING WORDS SUCH AS “MORE” AND “MILK” AT 8 MONTHS AND CAN BUILD VOCABULARIES OF DOZENS OF SIGNS WITHIN MONTHS. (THE BLADE – TOLEDO, OHIO, SEPTEMBER 9, 2001)

Here's more on the benefits of early sign language exposure and bilingualism:
"Research has found many advantages to learning sign language, including:
  • Early first language learning helps facilitate, and may even be necessary, for learning a second language later in life.19
  • Early exposed signers have better academic performance compared to late exposed deaf in a variety of areas,33 including better performance on:
    • tests of English syntax25, 33
    • reading tasks5, 32
    • written language tasks31
    • vocabulary26
    • overall academic achievement17, 29
  • Even moderate fluency in ASL benefits English literacy for Deaf children.30
  • Kids who understand more sign language, understand more English.35
  • Kids who produce more sign language, produce more English.35
  • Strong adult signers have better ASL narrative comprehension, and also higher English reading scores.7
  • The experience of “speaking” two languages (like ASL and English) on a regular basis has broad implications for cognitive ability, enhancing executive control functions and protecting the brain across the life span.2, 9, 11
  • Bilingualism may protect against age-related cognitive decline.4 With all else being equal, one study found the age of dementia onset for bilinguals was 4 years later than it was for monolinguals.
Common Concerns – Is it too difficult for young children to learn two languages (English and ASL) at once? Maybe we should just focus on one language to start.
There is a misconceived fear that teaching babies more than one language too early may cause language delays or language confusion or that the child may never be as competent in either of the languages as a monolingual child is in one. In fact, research shows babies know that they are acquiring two distinct languages and are able to learn them without language delay or language confusion. Bilingual babies are able to reach the classic language milestones on a similar timetable as monolingual babies, such as when they say their first word, when they can say their first fifty words, and when they say their first two-word combinations. There are a few differences though. For example, when counting the child’s first fifty words, the tally would come from a total of words produced in both languages. Young children may also show a language preference and use one of their languages more, however, this is not a delay in language learning, it simply shows a preference, which could change over time, and is often related to the child’s primary sociolinguistic group (for example, the language used by peer groups in school, or if one parent is home all day using one language with a baby, it will often be preferred over a second language that is used when the rest of the family is home only at night). It doesn’t make sense to take away any language to focus on just one. Early exposure of both languages is what is best for the child and will help the child to reach fullest mastery in each of the languages.23

Conclusion
The key to learning language and becoming fluent is early exposure and full access to a natural language.10 Babies are capable of learning any language, and multiple languages, from birth.6, 13Research shows there are many benefits to learning ASL, and the sooner you can start, the better. There are both linguistic and cognitive advantages to being bilingual. Learning both ASL and English from an early age will help the child to reach fluency in both languages. The best time to start learning language is now.
Sources:
  1. Bavelier, D., Newport, E.L., & Supalla, T. (2003, January 01). Children Need Natural Languages, Signed or Spoken. The Dana Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/Default.aspx?id=39306
  2. Bialystok, E., & Craik, F.I.M. (2010). Cognitive and Linguistic Processing in the Bilingual Mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(1), 19-23.
  3. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., & Freedman, M. (2007). Bilingualism as a protection against the onset of symptoms of dementia. Neuropsychologia, 45, 459-464.
  4. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290-303.
  5. Brasel, K. & Quigley, S. (1977, March). Influence of Certain Language and Communication Environments in Early Childhood on the Development of Language in Deaf Individuals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 20, 95-107.
  6. Brentari, D. (Ed.). (2010). Sign languages. Cambridge University Press.
  7. Chamberlain, C., & Mayberry, R. (2008, July 1). American Sign Language syntactic and narrative comprehension in skilled and less skilled readers: Bilingual and bimodal evidence for the linguistic basis of reading. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29(3), 367-388.
  8. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Why sign with deaf babies? [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  9. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Bilingualism: Unimodal and Bimodal [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  10. Davidson, L.S., Geers, A.E., & Nicholas, J.G. (2014, July). The effects of audibility and novel word learning ability on vocabulary level in children with cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int., 15(4), 211-221.

    continued....
Click to expand...
#7 compared only ASL users to other ASL users. Everyone knows that if you do not have a good first language you won't be able to learn literacy in it and certainly not in another language. That was not the question.
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
And which one did this study use? I couldn't tell from the abstract.

And the thing that has changed in the last 41 years was the amount of access to spoken language children have had and at what age they had it. The children in this study would have had analog hearing aids (if they had any) and would not have been identified before age 3. Our children are identified at birth now, fitted with devices that allow access to all sounds of spoken language and begin intervention by 6 months. We know that even a delay of 6 months is linked to .3 of a standard deviation on language testing. Therefore a full 3 years is dramatic.
Click to expand...

Do you actually know what it's like to "hear" with hearing aids??? You seem to think they suddenly make us as capable as hearing people. They don't. I've been waiting 6 months for my new HAs because CO Medicaid doesn't cover a penny and they're over $6,000 Even with the new ones it's far from "normal" hearing. I can't wear them swimming, they don't work when I ski and snowboard. You're forcing this technology on Deaf/HoH people with the ignorant and incorrect idea we can always have them and wear them. They're incredibly expensive and a huge burden on many Deaf/HoH people who use them.

It's not like I'm against HAs seeing as I use them, but I'm against hearing people who think using them should be our only way to communicate and we need to be in the hearing world, with no thought to how we aren't full hearing and don't fit into their world.
 
zeefour said:
Do you actually know what it's like to "hear" with hearing aids??? You seem to think they suddenly make us as capable as hearing people. They don't. I've been waiting 6 months for my new HAs because CO Medicaid doesn't cover a penny and they're over $6,000 Even with the new ones it's far from "normal" hearing. I can't wear them swimming, they don't work when I ski and snowboard. You're forcing this technology on Deaf/HoH people with the ignorant and incorrect idea we can always have them and wear them. They're incredibly expensive and a huge burden on many Deaf/HoH people who use them.

It's not like I'm against HAs seeing as I use them, but I'm against hearing people who think using them should be our only way to communicate and we need to be in the hearing world, with no thought to how we aren't full hearing and don't fit into their world.
Click to expand...
Again, I am not in a position where I could possibly force anyone to do anything. If you don't want hearing aids, don't use them.
 
Teacherofthedeaf said:
Again, I am not in a position where I could possibly force anyone to do anything. If you don't want hearing aids, don't use them.
Click to expand...

You're oversimplifying a very complicated issue that you don't understand, no matter how many fancy degrees you have that you think makes you able to tell Deaf people what's best for them.

I'm not against hearing aids again I use them, I have them on right now. But to force them and CIs as the only acceptable solution for Deaf/HoH overlooks a lot of the flaws. Having sign language in addition to HAs/CIs and speaking or whatever modes of communication, is better. 95% of DHH children are born into hearing families. Of course many of them want what's best for us but think that's being as close to hearing as possible. Many of us learn the hard way that doesn't work. HAs don't make us hearing. Relying on only verbal language leaves us out of so much. We are not members of the hearing community. But if we're stripped of our Deaf identity as children, we don't belong there either. It's very difficult as a teenager and young adult grappling with these issues. I had an amazing ASL professor who is hearing but fluent in ASL and uses it. She encouraged me to work on my ASL and become more active in the Deaf community and explore my Deaf identity. She's also in Child Find/Eaqrly Intervention homes where she teaches families ASL and uses it with the children. Many also have CIs and HAs but are being exposed to fluent ASL with the idea they will be taught fluent English later.

This gives us agency, this gives us a choice. It allows us not only the best way to succeed linguistically (which is what we've been arguing about) but it allows us to have all the tools we need to access either the hearing or the Deaf community.
 
zeefour said:
@Teacherofthedeaf

Continued.,...

Here's a few points with the associated research from another site:

*CHILDREN WHO LEARN SIGN LANGUAGE MAY HAVE MORE BRAIN CAPACITY LATER, LEARN TO SPEAK SOONER, AND DO BETTER ON FUTURE IQ TESTS. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*11-MONTH-OLDS WHO LEARNED SIGN LANGUAGE OUT SCORED NON-SIGNING PEERS IN LANGUAGE ABILITIES, STANDARD IQ TESTS AND VOCABULARY COMPREHENSION TESTS AFTER SECOND GRADE. (THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN, MARCH 1999)

*AN ANSWER TO THE COMMENT, “IF HE LEARNS TO SIGN, HE’S NOT GOING TO TALK”:
RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT BABIES WHO LEARN TO COMMUNICATE WITH SIGN LANGUAGE ARE QUICKER TO SPEAK THAN THEIR NON-SIGNING PEERS. SIGNING CREATES A MORE VERBAL ENVIRONMENT, BECAUSE BABIES INITIATE CONVERSATION ABOUT SUBJECTS THAT INTEREST THEM, AND THEIR PARENTS MORE CONSCIOUSLY REPEAT WORDS. EARLIER EXPOSURE TO SUCCESSFUL COMMUNICATION ACTUALLY DRIVES BABIES TO WANT TO SPEAK SOONER. (THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, JULY 3, 2001)

*HEARING BABIES SPEAK THEIR FIRST WORD, ON THE AVERAGE, WHEN THEY’RE 13 MONTHS OLD AND SPEAK TWO- OR THREE- WORD SENTENCES BY THE TIME THEY’RE 20 MONTHS OLD. IN CONTRAST, SOME BABIES CAN START SIGNING WORDS SUCH AS “MORE” AND “MILK” AT 8 MONTHS AND CAN BUILD VOCABULARIES OF DOZENS OF SIGNS WITHIN MONTHS. (THE BLADE – TOLEDO, OHIO, SEPTEMBER 9, 2001)

Here's more on the benefits of early sign language exposure and bilingualism:
"Research has found many advantages to learning sign language, including:
  • Early first language learning helps facilitate, and may even be necessary, for learning a second language later in life.19
  • Early exposed signers have better academic performance compared to late exposed deaf in a variety of areas,33 including better performance on:
    • tests of English syntax25, 33
    • reading tasks5, 32
    • written language tasks31
    • vocabulary26
    • overall academic achievement17, 29
  • Even moderate fluency in ASL benefits English literacy for Deaf children.30
  • Kids who understand more sign language, understand more English.35
  • Kids who produce more sign language, produce more English.35
  • Strong adult signers have better ASL narrative comprehension, and also higher English reading scores.7
  • The experience of “speaking” two languages (like ASL and English) on a regular basis has broad implications for cognitive ability, enhancing executive control functions and protecting the brain across the life span.2, 9, 11
  • Bilingualism may protect against age-related cognitive decline.4 With all else being equal, one study found the age of dementia onset for bilinguals was 4 years later than it was for monolinguals.
Common Concerns – Is it too difficult for young children to learn two languages (English and ASL) at once? Maybe we should just focus on one language to start.
There is a misconceived fear that teaching babies more than one language too early may cause language delays or language confusion or that the child may never be as competent in either of the languages as a monolingual child is in one. In fact, research shows babies know that they are acquiring two distinct languages and are able to learn them without language delay or language confusion. Bilingual babies are able to reach the classic language milestones on a similar timetable as monolingual babies, such as when they say their first word, when they can say their first fifty words, and when they say their first two-word combinations. There are a few differences though. For example, when counting the child’s first fifty words, the tally would come from a total of words produced in both languages. Young children may also show a language preference and use one of their languages more, however, this is not a delay in language learning, it simply shows a preference, which could change over time, and is often related to the child’s primary sociolinguistic group (for example, the language used by peer groups in school, or if one parent is home all day using one language with a baby, it will often be preferred over a second language that is used when the rest of the family is home only at night). It doesn’t make sense to take away any language to focus on just one. Early exposure of both languages is what is best for the child and will help the child to reach fullest mastery in each of the languages.23

Conclusion
The key to learning language and becoming fluent is early exposure and full access to a natural language.10 Babies are capable of learning any language, and multiple languages, from birth.6, 13Research shows there are many benefits to learning ASL, and the sooner you can start, the better. There are both linguistic and cognitive advantages to being bilingual. Learning both ASL and English from an early age will help the child to reach fluency in both languages. The best time to start learning language is now.
Sources:
  1. Bavelier, D., Newport, E.L., & Supalla, T. (2003, January 01). Children Need Natural Languages, Signed or Spoken. The Dana Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/Default.aspx?id=39306
  2. Bialystok, E., & Craik, F.I.M. (2010). Cognitive and Linguistic Processing in the Bilingual Mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(1), 19-23.
  3. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., & Freedman, M. (2007). Bilingualism as a protection against the onset of symptoms of dementia. Neuropsychologia, 45, 459-464.
  4. Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290-303.
  5. Brasel, K. & Quigley, S. (1977, March). Influence of Certain Language and Communication Environments in Early Childhood on the Development of Language in Deaf Individuals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 20, 95-107.
  6. Brentari, D. (Ed.). (2010). Sign languages. Cambridge University Press.
  7. Chamberlain, C., & Mayberry, R. (2008, July 1). American Sign Language syntactic and narrative comprehension in skilled and less skilled readers: Bilingual and bimodal evidence for the linguistic basis of reading. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29(3), 367-388.
  8. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Why sign with deaf babies? [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  9. Chen Pichler, D. (2016, Fall). Bilingualism: Unimodal and Bimodal [Video Lecture]. Gallaudet University: PST 375 Language Learning by Eye or by Ear.
  10. Davidson, L.S., Geers, A.E., & Nicholas, J.G. (2014, July). The effects of audibility and novel word learning ability on vocabulary level in children with cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int., 15(4), 211-221.

    continued....
Click to expand...
#9 says that children who hear better with their CIs learn new words more easily than those who don't hear as well. That, I think we both already knew.
 
zeefour said:
You're oversimplifying a very complicated issue that you don't understand, no matter how many fancy degrees you have that you think makes you able to tell Deaf people what's best for them.

I'm not against hearing aids again I use them, I have them on right now. But to force them and CIs as the only acceptable solution for Deaf/HoH overlooks a lot of the flaws. Having sign language in addition to HAs/CIs and speaking or whatever modes of communication, is better. 95% of DHH children are born into hearing families. Of course many of them want what's best for us but think that's being as close to hearing as possible. Many of us learn the hard way that doesn't work. HAs don't make us hearing. Relying on only verbal language leaves us out of so much. We are not members of the hearing community. But if we're stripped of our Deaf identity as children, we don't belong there either. It's very difficult as a teenager and young adult grappling with these issues. I had an amazing ASL professor who is hearing but fluent in ASL and uses it. She encouraged me to work on my ASL and become more active in the Deaf community and explore my Deaf identity. She's also in Child Find/Eaqrly Intervention homes where she teaches families ASL and uses it with the children. Many also have CIs and HAs but are being exposed to fluent ASL with the idea they will be taught fluent English later.

This gives us agency, this gives us a choice. It allows us not only the best way to succeed linguistically (which is what we've been arguing about) but it allows us to have all the tools we need to access either the hearing or the Deaf community.
Click to expand...
I don't force anyone to do anything. I do not make the choice for children. I do not provide CIs or hearing aids to anyone. A family chooses listening and spoken language services and then I provide them. Why is your beef with me? Do you believe that I shouldn't provide the services that a family wants? Do you believe that families shouldn't be allowed to choose?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top