SEE is a language... It's English...

[deafskeptic]

all of you are going to hell. why? because we have audists to prod and poke with our forks.

I see you have your prod heated to red hot.

 

[Jazzberry]

In my case, I used images to reprenst words. For example, a house to stand in for the word house etc. For more abstract ideas like love, I thought of hearts like the ones you see on Valentines days and when i got older and learned sign, I would think of the sign and the printed words.

I have no idea what a lot of the English words that I know sound like and I would not recogonze them if they were spoken outloud. If someone wrote it down, I'd know.

Thanks DeafSkeptic, that's helpful. I grew up attaching meaning to what is probably millions of combinations of minor differences in sound. I had never thought about the feasibility of attaching direct meaning to what is probably million of combinations in minor differences in written symbols (eg English alphabet) but you are living proof that it can be done.

Here's some more dumb questions if you don't mind. Even though you don't know know what a lot of the English words sound like, do you have an association between the written word and a set of tongue and lip movements? As a hard of hearing child I needed to do that, partially. The combination of my hearing loss and the hearing aid available to me ended up in my learning how to make a lot of sounds by feel -- such as s, f, ch, sh, th, l, d, t, etc. I could hear some of the sounds but not accurately enough to model them correctly without speech therapy. Even now I usually spend a few minutes a day figuring out how to pronounce new words or reminding myself how to pronounce old words with the help of a dictionary. Often when I look up a word its not to find its meaning but to remind myself how to pronounce it.

Anyway, that was difficult to learn as a hard of hearing child -- I can just imagine how much more difficult it would be for a child with a profound loss.

Next dumb question -- if it were possible to translate English books, newspapers, web sites, etc. into SignWriting, do you think it might be a more accessible option for some Deaf people? Or would too much be lost in the translation so that it wouldn't be worth it? I know SignWriting isn't popular but perhaps thats because there's not much written in it?

 

[posts from hell]

I see you have your prod heated to red hot.

cinnamon flavored too.

 

[CSign]

Your child is only a few years old. He is still in the stage of acquiring a language.

My son is 7 years old; and while he's still acquiring and learning English, he has established proficiency in it.

 

[rebeccalj]

My son is 7 years old; and while he's still acquiring and learning English, he has established proficiency in it.

And I'm sure he identifies as Deaf. :roll:

 

[CSign]

so you're saying we're wrong and we don't know any better?

don't you think it's fair for us to say same for you that you seem to think that only you are capable of higher learning and understanding?

I have never, and would never say someone is wrong because they use a different primary mode of communication.

I also never said or implied the second statement, and you are intentionally twisting a comment in response to Jillio.

Neither of the above are productive.

 

[GrendelQ]

And I'm sure he identifies as Deaf. :roll:

Hi rebeccalj, I think the only parents who have suggested that their children consider themselves Deaf are PFH and me.

In our case, my child has been in a bi-bi school for 4 years where Deaf culture is celebrated and inculcated in the students, ASL was her first language and she is in an ASL immersion environment for nearly 10 hours each day, her friends are Deaf with many Deaf of Deaf kids in her circle, and she socializes with Deaf families outside school.

Her distinction isn't so much audiological as cultural, and it's pretty simple -- which makes sense at her age, it's not based on the politics or history of being Deaf or a lot of deep self-assessment: she distinguishes primarily, but not solely, on language and on cues people themselves put out. She considers a hearing teacher who uses only ASL (at her school) and has a Deaf family to be Deaf and Hearing, (which is what she calls herself, too). She calls one AD member she has met who uses ASL and has a CI to be Hearing (that person is deaf, was raised oral, and is relatively new to ASL).

It's not really a big deal and doesn't mean these 2 kids are geniuses -- although they might be : developing that sense of belonging to a social construct a child is exposed to, such as a culture based on a linguistic commonality or distinct customs, is something that child development experts such as Erikson and Vygotsky say occurs early, and in cycles throughout a person's life, with differences between cultures becoming apparent to a child between 3-4, and affiliation, developing a sense of belonging to a social group or race or culture, first occurring between 5-7.

 

[Mountain Man]

Literacy is linked to the ability to use (and know) english for face to face communication.

No it's not. For example, my dad can read and write Greek, but he could never use it for face to face communication. Nevertheless, he is literate in Greek.

English certainly is [a natural language].

English is a natural language for hearing people. ASL is a natural language for Deaf people. SEE is not a natural language for anybody.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

so.... what is this talk about children needing to read English? I don't get it.... children can't learn to read until around 4-5 years old... but their communication skill begins much earlier than that. that's where ASL comes in.

yes, they need full language to communicate, that is a given, everyone agrees to that. The next step is literacy. And the experts are saying that ASL alone will not provide for literacy, that the child also needs to know and use English before reading and writing instruction begins.

 

[Mountain Man]

and in what way do we teach English? The child needs to know the language BEFORE they try to learn to read. So, how do we get them a mastery of English?

You're far too narrow minded. There are ways to teach English using ASL without resorting to things like SEE.

Here's one example:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfzQoUVuEHg&feature=related]‪ASLE: "Much" and "Many"?‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

and in what way do we teach English? The child needs to know the language BEFORE they try to learn to read. So, how do we get them a mastery of English?

You're far too narrow minded. There are ways to teach English using ASL without resorting to things like SEE.

Here's one example:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfzQoUVuEHg&feature=related]‪ASLE: "Much" and "Many"?‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

where did i ever suggest using SEE? There are many different ways to learn English. You are the only one who said that there is one right way to educate a deaf child.

 

[Mountain Man]

In the case of this particular experiment, they took what might be an unknown language (English) out of the equation and measured the students on their learning upon receiving instruction in ASL. They also measured their learning upon receiving instruction in printed text. Found that the ASL-using students, even those who were highly fluent native users, did better learning with the printed text, rather than the signed instruction. The finding that even deaf of deaf did better with printed text than sign was unexpected. In one of Marschark's experiments, deaf students did best using a mixed media approach with real time text (like CART). But in these varied approaches (with spoken language instruction, with ASL instruction, with printed text), the deaf students significantly underperformed hearing students. This led researchers to conclude that it's not a reading issue, or an English as a second language issue, but something else that differentiates the deaf learning process from the hearing learning process yet to be determined.

I have some questions about this study. Was the same experiment conducted with hearing students using spoken English only with no reinforcement through written materials? Were the instructors native ASL users who were qualified to be teaching the subject matter, or was the information relayed through an interpreter? Was there an effort to make the material as visually accessible as possible, or was it basically traditional classroom instruction but in ASL?

 

[GrendelQ]

I have some questions about this study. Was the same experiment conducted with hearing students using spoken English only with no reinforcement through written materials? Were the instructors native ASL users who were qualified to be teaching the subject matter, or was the information relayed through an interpreter? Was there an effort to make the material as visually accessible as possible, or was it basically traditional classroom instruction but in ASL?

Are you able to access the link to the PDF I provided for the paper that Jillio had posted? The paper details the primary studies conducted as well as provide references to additional studies used as context. You can also contact Marschark directly with any questions via the educatingdeafchildren.org site at NTID, he answers questions regularly on the site.

 

[Mountain Man]

where did i ever suggest using SEE?

You said that it is impossible for a child to learn to read and write English without having mastered the language first. This is false. In fact, I couldn't even say that my 7-year old hearing son has mastered English, but he reads and writes quite well at a level appropriate for his age. My 5-year old Deaf son knows his alphabet and is capable of sight reading simple words, and he has had effectively zero exposure to spoken English. I know several Deaf people who could never use English for face to face communication, yet they are literate and able to read and write English. Furthermore, there are a number of Deaf members of this very forum telling you the same thing. Why are you being so stubborn?

You are the only one who said that there is one right way to educate a deaf child.

I never said that, but how like you to twist my words to try and score debate points.

 

[GrendelQ]

You're far too narrow minded. There are ways to teach English using ASL without resorting to things like SEE.

Here's one example:

‪ASLE: "Much" and "Many"?‬‏ - YouTube

I could be wrong, but I don't think FJ is suggesting SEE at all If you are looking for ways to represent the English language, the paper FJ provided a link to earlier What Really Matters in the Early Literacy Development of Deaf Children discusses several of these, not just Signed English. It also discusses that link between face to face communication in English (including speechreading) she mentioned and literacy. It's been documented pretty extensively.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

where did i ever suggest using SEE?

You said that it is impossible for a child to learn to read and write English without having mastered the language first. This is false. In fact, I couldn't even say that my 7-year old hearing son has mastered English, but he reads and writes quite well at a level appropriate for his age. My 5-year old Deaf son knows his alphabet and is capable of sight reading simple words, and he has had effectively zero exposure to spoken English. I know several Deaf people who could never use English for face to face communication, yet they are literate and able to read and write English. Furthermore, there are a number of Deaf members of this very forum telling you the same thing. Why are you being so stubborn?

You are the only one who said that there is one right way to educate a deaf child.

I never said that, but how like you to twist my words to try and score debate points.

your hearing child DOES know English. That is the language they have heard and used since birth. And if your deaf one is fingerspelling THAT IS exposure to English! How can a child learn to read a language they have never been exposed to, learned or used?

 

[Mountain Man]

your hearing child DOES know English. That is the language they have heard and used since birth. And if your deaf one is fingerspelling THAT IS exposure to English! How can a child learn to read a language they have never been exposed to, learned or used?

You've implied that a mastery of spoken English is necessary for literacy. This is false. That literacy is linked to face to face communication does not mean that it is dependent on it. This is where your cart comes off the tracks.

Also, fingerspelling is as much a part of ASL as any other sign in that a fingespelled word is a series of signs, not a series of letters.

 

[Mountain Man]

I could be wrong, but I don't think FJ is suggesting SEE at all

Who knows what she's suggesting. It has been my experience that she waffles and equivocates to such an extent that her true position becomes (I believe deliberately) obscured.

It also discusses that link between face to face communication in English (including speechreading) she mentioned and literacy. It's been documented pretty extensively.

There's a difference between a link and a dependency although faire_jour is attempting to equivocate the two.

 

[posts from hell]

Wirelessly posted



yes, they need full language to communicate, that is a given, everyone agrees to that. The next step is literacy. And the experts are saying that ASL alone will not provide for literacy, that the child also needs to know and use English before reading and writing instruction begins.

The child does NOT have to know English, ya see?

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

your hearing child DOES know English. That is the language they have heard and used since birth. And if your deaf one is fingerspelling THAT IS exposure to English! How can a child learn to read a language they have never been exposed to, learned or used?

You've implied that a mastery of spoken English is necessary for literacy. This is false. That literacy is linked to face to face communication does not mean that it is dependent on it. This is where your cart comes off the tracks.

Also, fingerspelling is as much a part of ASL as any other sign in that a fingespelled word is a series of signs, not a series of letters.

you are wrong. I have FLAT OUT said that it is not spoken language but English that matters.

first you are saying that i am supporting SEE, and then you say that i am advocating for spoken language for English. Which is it?

again, the research supports that a child needs to be able to use the language with a certain level of fluency (i have heard the idea of the language of a "5 year old" around, but never read that specifically, just that they need to be able to use the language for communication) in order to read and write.