Research Study

faire_jour said:
Correct, they are only testing spoken language. But the idea that a child in an ASL enviroment ends up with the same fluency in spoken language as a child in a listening and spoken language setting has been proven untrue, wouldn't you agree?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if we're on the same page. A child in an ASL environment will most likely be fluent in ASL, but may succeed in English as a 2nd language (if properly exposed to it). A child in an oral-only program may be fluent in English if properly exposed, but they may also have difficulty because of a delay in language exposure/training. Is that what you mean?
 
thanx2gezus said:
I'm not sure if we're on the same page. A child in an ASL environment will most likely be fluent in ASL, but may succeed in English as a 2nd language (if properly exposed to it). A child in an oral-only program may be fluent in English if properly exposed, but they may also have difficulty because of a delay in language exposure/training. Is that what you mean?
Click to expand...

I mean that ASL advocates claim that a child in an ASL enviroment can learn fluent spoken language through pull out speech therapy and after school activites to the same fluency as a child in an all oral enviroment.

I say that a child in an ASL enviroment will learn fluent ASL, and English as a second language through reading and writing, and will probably develop some speech skills. They will not however have the same spoken language achievement as an oral student.
 
faire_jour said:
I say that a child in an ASL enviroment will learn fluent ASL, and English as a second language through reading and writing, and will probably develop some speech skills. They will not however have the same spoken language achievement as an oral student.
Click to expand...

You couldn't be more wrong.
 
Honestly, I don't care if kids in an ASL environment have a lower spoken language score than kids in oral school. If I had a smart Deaf child who didn't speak perfect English, I'd be cool with that, over a kid who wasted a bunch of time on speech and lost education they could have gotten.

Anyway, I'd be curious to see how hard of hearing people feel about D/deaf people, versus how they feel about hearing people, in terms of their relating to them and feel a part of each culture. Do they feel like with HAs or whatever, they belong to the hearing world, or do most of them feel like they belong to the Deaf world? Obviously it varies, but I'm wondering what a majority of them think.

I'm assuming AD would have more people who feel connected to the Deaf world, because they are after all on All DEAF. You'd have to interview people in real life, probably.

The goal of audiologists I've met is to integrate HOH people into hearing society through HAs, so I'm wondering if the HOH person feels like they truly are a part of it.
 
It's useful for emergency, that's for sure :) But everyday conversation, I think it depends on the person and how well they carry on a conversation with hearing people, especially in groups because people like to get together in groups. Hardly anyone do one-in-one conversation. Everywhere I go, it's always in groups. My family, my friends, coworkers, etc.

I think majority feel they are in between worlds
 
faire_jour said:
I mean that ASL advocates claim that a child in an ASL enviroment can learn fluent spoken language through pull out speech therapy and after school activites to the same fluency as a child in an all oral enviroment.

I say that a child in an ASL enviroment will learn fluent ASL, and English as a second language through reading and writing, and will probably develop some speech skills. They will not however have the same spoken language achievement as an oral student.
Click to expand...

So this is mostly a question of first versus second language. I person will usually be more comfortable (fluent) in their first language, but it really depends on the amount and type of exposure. Some children CAN be as fluent in spoken English as a second language as children with spoken English as a first language. There are so many variables in this topic (type of school, home/dormatory environment, family life, type of therapy, age of diagnosis/identification, level of residual hearing, et cetera) that research is largely inconclusive on this topic.

This is a great idea! :ty:
 
and I think some oral only have the same speech skills as deaf in bi-bi.

oral only may have trouble with "ed" and "s" (or other silent sounds) in their speech, while bi-bi may have trouble with a different area in their speech (depending on what they are using to help them gain speech, like Hearing aids)

I like to know how effective speech skills is after they leave school? does it decline? I'm oral only, and I think my speech have decline since I left school. I don't have teachers talking to me all day. even at work, I was too busy working in quiet unless I need to talk to someone. These days, I do more of the talking because I have to have things done. When people talk to me, it is always under background noises.
 
A said:
and I think some oral only have the same speech skills as deaf in bi-bi.

oral only may have trouble with "ed" and "s" (or other silent sounds) in their speech, while bi-bi may have trouble with a different area in their speech (depending on what they are using to help them gain speech, like Hearing aids)

I like to know how effective speech skills is after they leave school or stop taking speech therapy? does it decline?
Click to expand...

My issue with the oral-only philosophy is forcing us to use our weakest sense to communicate, learn, and acquire language from. Sure I can speak well enough for most hearing people to understand me but what about my need to understand others? I need that and I believe all deaf children should have the same rights as well. Why make communication and learning more difficult? That is something I have trouble understanding when people justify the oral-only approach. Oh well.
 
Me either.

But do think my speech have decline. People keep asking my husband what I said, they couldn't understand me. My husband had to interpret what I said. Crazy. He also interpet what they said because I can't understand them very well in background noise (they certainly can understand each other without a problem)

it's easier to understand my husband becaue I'm used to his voice, lipreading, etc.
 
A said:
and I think some oral only have the same speech skills as deaf in bi-bi.

oral only may have trouble with "ed" and "s" (or other silent sounds) in their speech, while bi-bi may have trouble with a different area in their speech (depending on what they are using to help them gain speech, like Hearing aids)

I like to know how effective speech skills is after they leave school? does it decline? I'm oral only, and I think my speech have decline since I left school. I don't have teachers talking to me all day. even at work, I was too busy working in quiet unless I need to talk to someone. These days, I do more of the talking because I have to have things done. When people talk to me, it is always under background noises.
Click to expand...

"ed" and "s" and not silent sounds. A child with a CI should be able to hear and discriminate those sounds along with all the other speech sounds.
 
Should?? do you speak for all CI kids? the "ed" or "s" are really quiet unless someone is close to you and it is not noisy.
 
A said:
Should?? do you speak for all CI kids? the "ed" or "s" are really quiet unless someone is close to you and it is not noisy.
Click to expand...

An appropriatly MAPed child with a CI should be able to hear the "s" sound at regular volume at a minimum of 20 feet away.
 
I don't know how that really sound like to them. It may be very irritating if those "s" is close by.. or make it difficult to know how close a person is if the "s" sound don't sound distance. but anyway, CI is full of guesswork and hopes (as in hoping this and that mapping will work for the child)
 
A said:
I don't know how that really sound like to them. It may be very irritating if those "s" is close by.. or make it difficult to know how close a person is if the "s" sound don't sound distance. but anyway, CI is full of guesswork and hopes (as in hoping this and that mapping will work for the child)
Click to expand...

It's not guesswork, it is a skill that a professional does. They do testing to see what the child can hear and at what distances. They test how quiet a voice can be and the child still can understand (not just hear, but understand) the words.They do testing to know what sounds they can discriminate and how well they hear with closed sets (word choices) and open sets (random sentences). It isn't crossing your fingers and blindly hoping.
 
Wirelessly posted

faire_jour said:
The studies back me up. They show that kids in an ASL enviroment have lower spoken language scores than those in an oral enviroment.
Click to expand...

No. That is false.

Usually, people tend to think deaf babies will not learn anything cos they can't hear anything to learn. All they do is so busy to focus on their ears and mouths, completely ignore the need of visual metords (sp) to learn something.

Just google up to find baby sign language. Plus, the founder of My Smart Hands did mention a few reasearchers noticed how d-eaf parents and deaf toddlers communicated so well before non-signer hearing toddlers can start to talk (usually two years old)...

Just saying...

EDIT: OOPS! Quote a wrong person! Sorry about that, Banjo. ^^;;;

EDIT II: (Removed the "*******" word.) I don't know why AllDeaf censored d-eaf parents. :confused:
 
Last edited:
faire_jour said:
It's not guesswork, it is a skill that a professional does. They do testing to see what the child can hear and at what distances. They test how quiet a voice can be and the child still can understand (not just hear, but understand) the words.They do testing to know what sounds they can discriminate and how well they hear with closed sets (word choices) and open sets (random sentences). It isn't crossing your fingers and blindly hoping.
Click to expand...

Of course it take some skills too. But children have skills as well (they just need clue words to fill in the blank)

but what I'm saying is, you don't know what it sound like. you can only think what it sound like. And I don't know what normal hearing sound like either.
 
KarissaMann05 said:
Wirelessly posted



No. That is false.

Usually, people tend to think deaf babies will not learn anything cos they can't hear anything to learn. All they do is so busy to focus on their ears and mouths, completely ignore the need of visual metords (sp) to learn something.

Just google up to find baby sign language. Plus, the founder of My Smart Hands did mention a few reasearchers noticed how d-eaf parents and deaf toddlers communicated so well before non-signer hearing toddlers can start to talk (usually two years old)...

Just saying...

EDIT: OOPS! Quote a wrong person! Sorry about that, Banjo. ^^;;;

EDIT II: (Removed the "*******" word.) I don't know why AllDeaf censored d-eaf parents. :confused:
Click to expand...

Actually, there is one study on hearing kids that shows that hearing babies who sign have slightly better language than those who don't. It has nothing to do with deaf kids. The research has shown that deaf kids in an oral enviroment have better spoken language scores than children in an ASL enviroment.
 
A said:
Of course it take some skills too. But children have skills as well (they just need clue words to fill in the blank)

but what I'm saying is, you don't know what it sound like. you can only think what it sound like.
Click to expand...

I don't know what it sounds like to be a child with a cochlear implant. I have no idea, neither do you. But there are people who were implanted as children, who are now adults (not a lot, but it is increasing every year) and we can ask them.
 
Back
Top