National Society for the Deaf

[jillio]

As Jillio said, oralists are against sign language to be the first language and want to restrict it's use in education. The spoken language should be the first language, what mode does not matter, even to AG Bell, the mother of oralism in the states.

Actually, jillio said:

She doesn't say anything about the first language, she said ONLY language. That's why I'm asking questions. There isn't anything that says that CS should not be used with ASL. They are promoting it for the use of communication in a spoken language. There is no reason why the child couldn't use both, depending on the situation.

The quotes also don't say anything about not using ASL at all. They only say that children who rely on only ASL have some difficulties with regards to reading.

Yes, owen06, I did say only language. That is because the oralists do not get the concept of an L1 language and an L2 language. To them, L1 language is all that is necessary, and that L1 language is always an orally based language. And the statement regarding children who rely on ASL having more reading problems is totally fictitious. When a child has acquired a stong foundation in an L1 language (sign), they are able to transfer that knowledge to learning another language (L2; English in print).

And again, CS with ASL is redundant.

 

[jillio]

Like Jillio said, this research have nothing with how hard it's to learn ASL do to, but what surprising low levels of fluency a child need in the parents compared to what you, Loml and NCSA claims. The myth from NCSA that a deaf child needs deaf parents to become literate and bilingual is completely false as we see in this research.

Many parents can tell you that ASL really isn't hard at all, and actually a joy to use. What is common is that parents try AVT, Cued Speech, oral ed, mainstream programs, and when that fails, the send their child to a TC or bilingual deaf school. That's were the half of parents with low level skills in ASL come from. Those parents who don't bother learn ASL, don't bother about Cued Speech either.

Where AG Bell leave BiBi alone, and gives parents a different choice, NCSA actively contribute to stop bilingual education by trying to convince parents that they should not use ASL as a natural/first language with their deaf child. The rudely part, is that NCSA begs to be a part of bilingual programs, who have experience with, and help parents with early ASL. This makes NCSA much more hostile toward ASL and bilingual education than the dreaded AG Bell, to me.

Somewhere in this mess, NCSA is doing the dirty work for AG Bell.

 

[deafskeptic]

Like Jillio said, this research have nothing with how hard it's to learn ASL do to, but what surprising low levels of fluency a child need in the parents compared to what you, Loml and NCSA claims. The myth from NCSA that a deaf child needs deaf parents to become literate and bilingual is completely false as we see in this research.

Many parents can tell you that ASL really isn't hard at all, and actually a joy to use. What is common is that parents try AVT, Cued Speech, oral ed, mainstream programs, and when that fails, the send their child to a TC or bilingual deaf school. That's were the half of parents with low level skills in ASL come from. Those parents who don't bother learn ASL, don't bother about Cued Speech either.

Where AG Bell leave BiBi alone, and gives parents a different choice, NCSA actively contribute to stop bilingual education by trying to convince parents that they should not use ASL as a natural/first language with their deaf child. The rudely part, is that NCSA begs to be a part of bilingual programs, who have experience with, and help parents with early ASL. This makes NCSA much more hostile toward ASL and bilingual education than the dreaded AG Bell, to me.

Somewhere in this mess, NCSA is doing the dirty work for AG Bell.

You're right. I hadn't thought about that. They're more proactive than AGB so they'd be more of a danger.


I think I read and write pretty well and I don't come from a deaf family and I never used cued speech very much except for the first 6 months into 2nd grade. After that, my mother used it only when I had trouble understanding her. I stopped using it after 4th grade.

 

[loml]

make that call..write that letter...

flip - Here is the contact information for the National Cued Speech Association. I am sure they would be more than happy to discuss with you your opinions, concerns, percieved dangers and conspiracy theories.

National Cued Speech Association
mailing address:
5619 McLean Drive
Bethesda, MD 20814-1021

800-459-3529 v/tty
301-915-8009 v/tty

CUEDSPEECH.org > Contact Us

 

[flip]

flip - Here is the contact information for the National Cued Speech Association. I am sure they would be more than happy to discuss with you your opinions, concerns, percieved dangers and conspiracy theories.

CUEDSPEECH.org > Contact Us

I don't think I have anything specific to diccuss with NCSA and do not have any concerns or conspiracy theories, perhaps you have? NCSA have a good website where they clearly explains their standpoint. Why not call them and ask for explainations, so you can make more consistent replies here?

 

[loml]

flip - I recall, and please correct me if this is incorrect, that you were raised in an strictly oral (am borrowing this term from Jillio) enviroment. Please try to understand that Cued Speech does not compare to the strict oral method. The reasons are: cueing of English (for example) is mutli - sensory: visual, kenesthetic, tactile and auditory (if this applies).

It would appear from your understanding of how CS words, that you were not provided the opportunity to cross paths with a ST that used cueing in her/his program.

These statements alone; originally posted by flip

Where AG Bell leave BiBi alone, and gives parents a different choice, NCSA actively contribute to stop bilingual education by trying to convince parents that they should not use ASL as a natural/first language with their deaf child. The rudely part, is that NCSA begs to be a part of bilingual programs, who have experience with, and help parents with early ASL. This makes NCSA much more hostile toward ASL and bilingual education than the dreaded AG Bell, to me.

Somewhere in this mess, NCSA is doing the dirty work for AG Bell.

- you statments regarding the NCSA are completely and utterly false. It is unfortunate that you choose not to embrace the opportunity to deal directly with the NCSA. Until you do, your comments, fears and theories are simply best defined as gossip.

 

[jillio]

flip - I recall, and please correct me if this is incorrect, that you were raised in an strictly oral (am borrowing this term from Jillio) enviroment. Please try to understand that Cued Speech does not compare to the strict oral method. The reasons are: cueing of English (for example) is mutli - sensory: visual, kenesthetic, tactile and auditory (if this applies).

It would appear from your understanding of how CS words, that you were not provided the opportunity to cross paths with a ST that used cueing in her/his program.

These statements alone; originally posted by flip - you statments regarding the NCSA are completely and utterly false. It is unfortunate that you choose not to embrace the opportunity to deal directly with the NCSA. Until you do, your comments, fears and theories are simply best defined as gossip.

It is not gossip when it is supported directly with information obtained from their website. They publish the information contained therein. Therefore, any information coming from their website can be considered to be direct contact with the organization.

Cuing is still a monolingual approach, just as all English based methods are monolingual and orally based.

Regarding the deaf community's response to CS, and the amount of benefit they feel it has provided, I refer you back to the numerous posts made by deaf individuals on this forum. You continue to discount thier experience and their ability to determine that which is useful for themselves, as autonomous and capable human beings, by placingthe blame for the failure of CS to gain widespread acceptance, rather than on the system, where it properly belongs.

 

[flip]

flip - I recall, and please correct me if this is incorrect, that you were raised in an strictly oral (am borrowing this term from Jillio) enviroment. Please try to understand that Cued Speech does not compare to the strict oral method. The reasons are: cueing of English (for example) is mutli - sensory: visual, kenesthetic, tactile and auditory (if this applies).

I was not raised in a strictly oral environment. I never said Cued Speech is auditory-oral, aural/oral, auditory verbal or strictly oral as you call it and don't know why you are bringing it up here. It might interest you that Cued Speech was praised by NCSA as a "A Visual-Oral Alternative for Limited Audition and Late Intervention Children" at a AG Bell convention.

It would appear from your understanding of how CS words, that you were not provided the opportunity to cross paths with a ST that used cueing in her/his program.

Yes, you are right, I got old fashioned speech therapy that worked perfect. Cued Speech would just be a hassle and take unecessary time.

These statements alone; originally posted by flip - you statments regarding the NCSA are completely and utterly false. It is unfortunate that you choose not to embrace the opportunity to deal directly with the NCSA. Until you do, your comments, fears and theories are simply best defined as gossip.

You crack me up, Loml. I did not make any utterly false statements, I just reproduced the claims of NCSA on their website, and your and Owens statements.

NCSA have a website where all the positons are clearly explained, and they have a FAQ section so people don't have to write letters and call them to get answers. I hope you don't are implying that the positions explained there are false.

 

[flip]

Regarding the deaf community's response to CS, and the amount of benefit they feel it has provided, I refer you back to the numerous posts made by deaf individuals on this forum. You continue to discount thier experience and their ability to determine that which is useful for themselves, as autonomous and capable human beings, by placingthe blame for the failure of CS to gain widespread acceptance, rather than on the system, where it properly belongs.

The behavior from those oralists are too often offensive and aggresive to deaf people. Oralism is sometimes more about ignoring the voices and experiences of deaf people, than methods. You said it well!

 

[loml]

I never said Cued Speech is auditory-oral, aural/oral, auditory verbal or strictly oral as you call it and don't know why you are bringing it up here.

I never said Cued Speech was strictly oral flip.
Don't know how you have come to this statement.

Yes, you are right, I got old fashioned speech therapy that worked perfect. Cued Speech would just be a hassle and take unecessary time.

flip - How do you come to this conclusion if you have never experienced it?


orginally posted by flip

Where AG Bell leave BiBi alone, and gives parents a different choice, NCSA actively contribute to stop bilingual education by trying to convince parents that they should not use ASL as a natural/first language with their deaf child. The rudely part, is that NCSA begs to be a part of bilingual programs, who have experience with, and help parents with early ASL. This makes NCSA much more hostile toward ASL and bilingual education than the dreaded AG Bell, to me.Somewhere in this mess, NCSA is doing the dirty work for AG Bell.

flip - see the quote of yours in purlple?? You did not copy that from the NCSA website. These are your words, utterly false and read as gossip.

Hope that clears up the confusion.

 

[shel90]

Then perhaps we need to concentrate on ways to improve the fluency in ASL of hearing parents rather than devising more artificial systems for communication for the deaf child.

That would be so great! Unfortunately, too many myths about ASL being a detrimemt to literacy skills are still floating around.

 

[shel90]

Like Jillio said, this research have nothing with how hard it's to learn ASL do to, but what surprising low levels of fluency a child need in the parents compared to what you, Loml and NCSA claims. The myth from NCSA that a deaf child needs deaf parents to become literate and bilingual is completely false as we see in this research.

Many parents can tell you that ASL really isn't hard at all, and actually a joy to use. What is common is that parents try AVT, Cued Speech, oral ed, mainstream programs, and when that fails, the send their child to a TC or bilingual deaf school. That's were the half of parents with low level skills in ASL come from. Those parents who don't bother learn ASL, don't bother about Cued Speech either.

Where AG Bell leave BiBi alone, and gives parents a different choice, NCSA actively contribute to stop bilingual education by trying to convince parents that they sho:uld not use ASL as a natural/first language with their deaf child. The rudely part, is that NCSA begs to be a part of bilingual programs, who have experience with, and help parents with early ASL. This makes NCSA much more hostile toward ASL and bilingual education than the dreaded AG Bell, to me.

Somewhere in this mess, NCSA is doing the dirty work for AG Bell.

 

[shel90]

The behavior from those oralists are too often offensive and aggresive to deaf people. Oralism is sometimes more about ignoring the voices and experiences of deaf people, than methods. You said it well!

It is so tiring..

 

[jillio]

The behavior from those oralists are too often offensive and aggresive to deaf people. Oralism is sometimes more about ignoring the voices and experiences of deaf people, than methods. You said it well!

 

[jillio]

I never said Cued Speech was strictly oral flip.
Don't know how you have come to this statement.



flip - How do you come to this conclusion if you have never experienced it?


orginally posted by flip

flip - see the quote of yours in purlple?? You did not copy that from the NCSA website. These are your words, utterly false and read as gossip.

Regarding the purple: how exactly can an opinion based on information obtained directly fromthe website? Once can assume that the NCSA does not post false information.

Flip has formed an opinion based on what has been stated by the NCSA. An opinion can be different: an opinion cannot be false. An opinion is subjective. While you may disagree with an opinion, that simply means that it is different than yours. I does not make it false. Rather than attempting to point out the false nature of something subjective that has no right or wrong, you would do better attempting to support your own subjective opinion. Attempting to point out the untrue nature of that which is neither true or untrue, but simply is, does not support your position, nor is it an effective argument.
QUOTE]

 

[flip]

I never said Cued Speech was strictly oral flip.
Don't know how you have come to this statement.

flip - How do you come to this conclusion if you have never experienced it?

orginally posted by flip

flip - see the quote of yours in purlple?? You did not copy that from the NCSA website. These are your words, utterly false and read as gossip.

Hope that clears up the confusion.

You aren't even able to tell why and what excactly is "utterly false", and what's true, nor seperating opinions from facts. As long you aren't able to do so, it's pointless to make any replies to your accusations.

Cued Speech is so yesterday. Visual Phonics have taken the role Cued Speech had in the sixties, a special education tool. I hope NCSA manages to find a niche, as they seems to have some kind of identity crisis, based on the posts here from you and their website.

Good luck figuring out this and that.

I never had problems with speech or learning to read and write in my native country language, making Cued Speech totally redundant in ALL situations.

 

[owen06]

"..by cueing, children who are deaf would have a easily way to acquire the native home language, read and write proficiently, and more easily communicate with hearing family members who cue."

"Cueing enables them to communicate with all members of family simultanleously, without switching between languages."

"Signing does not provide phonemic awareness for spoken languages. Students who use a sign system or ASL struggle with connecting the signs to printed words."

This is from NCSA. As Jillio said, oralists are against sign language to be the first language and want to restrict it's use in education. The spoken language should be the first language, what mode does not matter, even to AG Bell, the mother of oralism in the states.

flip- could you please provide the link to the page that you found those quotes? I've been looking through the NCSA web page and haven't had any luck.

Thanks

 

[flip]

flip- could you please provide the link to the page that you found those quotes? I've been looking through the NCSA web page and haven't had any luck.

Thanks

Here you go:

http://cuedspeech.org/PDF/Cueing_with_Babies.pdf
Notice the reference to oral litterature in the resource list, among them AG Bell papers.

http://www.cuedspeech.org/PDF/Myths_and_Facts.pdf
Here we read that Cornett envisioned that ASL is a part of the deaf community, but it says nothing about it's use in language and education.

http://www.cuedspeech.org/PDF/CS_why_is_it_important.pdf

You are welcome.

 

[loml]

Originally Posted by flip

"..by cueing, children who are deaf would have a easily way to acquire the native home language, read and write proficiently, and more easily communicate with hearing family members who cue."

flip - Are you of the opinion then that cueing does not accomplish the above mentioned items? If so, how does cueing not do this?

"Cueing enables them to communicate with all members of family simultanleously, without switching between languages."
Again, flip, are you of the opinion that cueing doesn't enable its users to communicate without having to switch languages? How is it that you feel this is something a deaf child in a hearing family should not be provided?

Signing does not provide phonemic awareness for spoken languages. Students who use a sign system or ASL struggle with connecting the signs to printed words." flip - So, let me make sure I have this right then. You are saying that students who use a sign system or ASL do not struggle with connecting the signs to printed word?

This is from NCSA. As Jillio said, oralists are against sign language to be the first language and want to restrict it's use in education. The spoken language should be the first language, what mode does not matter, even to AG Bell, the mother of oralism in the states.

flip - also from the NCSA is:

Cued Speech does not require the use of speech or voice to communicate clearly, nor was it developed for the purpose of improving a deaf person’s speech skills. While speech therapists and auditory rehabilitation specialists have employed the use of cueing in therapy sessions as a biofeedback tool, it is considered a secondary benefit of the system. In the 1960s, it was believed that phonemes and speech were interrelated and could not be separated, and this is partly why the system was named “Cued Speech".

and this: Cued Speech was developed to help raise the literacy levels of deaf individuals. Dr. Cornett, the creator of Cued Speech, envisioned that sign language would always be a part of the deaf community; however, by cueing, children who are deaf would have a way to easily acquire the native home language, read and write proficiently, and more easily communicate with hearing family members who cue.

www.cuedpseech.org

 

[jillio]

I'd say a system has to be in widespread use before it can be determined that it is capable of accomplishing anything. Forty years after Dr. Cornett devised the system, it has not been used on a consistent enough basis to determine its efficacy in any capacity. The best there is out there is a few anecdotal accounts. There is virtually nothing that supports its efficacy in language acquisition,as a communication sstem, and cerainly not its efficacy in increasing literacy scores. Everything about it is unsupported hypothesis.