Should ASL be Banned from Deaf Ed programs?

[Daredevel7]

Yes, I agree..when I first started the grad program in Deaf ed, I thought the same as the others...try oral first and then ASL later if it wasnt successful. My views of that changed when I saw what happened to those kids' language and cognitive processing development with that approach. Ouch! It was an eye-opener. There were deaf kids with no other congnitive disabilities who were like 8 or 9 years old (I noticed that seems to be the average age where the deficients become very much obvious) who had no concept of next year or next month or had no concept between man/woman and boy/girl. I was like..."oooh that is so wrong!"

Have a good day everyone..I am off to teach!

I have personally experienced this with a family member. He was born profoundly deaf, and did not have any defined language (other than a few made up signs for food/drink) until he got the CI (8 years old). Turns out that he was legally blind (he could still see, but very blurry) AND had ADD. Now he is 15 years old and going through the whole teenager period . He speaks very well (better than me!), still 100% oral, and has been trained to hear well enough to talk on the phone (which I can't do). It's very much possible that ASL may have helped this boy develop much earlier. I'm just glad he's caught up now.

 

[jillio]

Obviously I don't have the capability for data collecting and whatnot. Therefore, I asked if it's a representative answer of those in the BiBi progreams. Otherwise, I wouldn't know. No harm in asking questions.

And that was why I was expaining to you that your question cannot be answered in this way. Again, all you can possibly come up with is the anecdote of one individual. That information cannot be extrapolated to draw conclusions about a whole.

 

[jillio]

To me, it does not matter whether we were expecting someone to say those words or not still it was clearly for me to be able to tell the differences and I was able to picked it up quickly -- the "L" and "R" letters without guessing..

Perhaps if someone has a long moustache or beard then yes it may be more difficult and impossible for me to read or if someone has an unfamiliar accent. I , I haven't experience that one yet but it will be very interesting.

It may not matter to you, and that is fine. But when you are attempting to extrapolate to an entire population, prior knowledge indeed invalidates the results of the individual under these circumstances.

 

[jillio]

I have personally experienced this with a family member. He was born profoundly deaf, and did not have any defined language (other than a few made up signs for food/drink) until he got the CI (8 years old). Turns out that he was legally blind (he could still see, but very blurry) AND had ADD. Now he is 15 years old and going through the whole teenager period . He speaks very well (better than me!), still 100% oral, and has been trained to hear well enough to talk on the phone (which I can't do). It's very much possible that ASL may have helped this boy develop much earlier. I'm just glad he's caught up now.

You are assuming that his language delays have been "caught up" based on the fact that he speaks well, and can use a phone after having been "trained"?

 

[rockdrummer]

It may not matter to you, and that is fine. But when you are attempting to extrapolate to an entire population, prior knowledge indeed invalidates the results of the individual under these circumstances.

Where are the metrics (in this context) to support such a statement?

 

[jillio]

Where are the metrics to support such a statement?

Exactly what metrics are you referring to? It is common and accepted knowledge that one cannot extrapolate the singualr experience of one or a few to an entire population.

Likewise, it is common and accepted knowledge that prior knowledge indeed affects speech reading accuracy, as well as auditory discrimination.

 

[Cheri]

It may not matter to you, and that is fine. But when you are attempting to extrapolate to an entire population, prior knowledge indeed invalidates the results of the individual under these circumstances.

You seem to know so much about the deaf population based on lip reading, Many of us have told you that those two words were not similar. I sure do not need a hearing person telling us otherwise.

 

[rockdrummer]

Exactly what metrics are you referring to? It is common and accepted knowledge that one cannot extrapolate the singualr experience of one or a few to an entire population.

Likewise, it is common and accepted knowledge that prior knowledge indeed affects speech reading accuracy, as well as auditory discrimination.

and how exactly does that apply to the discussion that is in disagreement with your assessment of lipreading. Those are the metrics I am taling about and also why I said (in this context). Your general answer is correct. My question is where are the metrcs that show the general population is unable to make the distinctions that others here are saying they can make.

 

[jillio]

You seem to know so much about the deaf population based on lip reading, Many of us have told you that those two words were not similar. I sure do not need a hearing person telling us otherwise.

Well, tell me Cheri, if lipreading is indeed as effective as you seem to believe it is, why is it that you use sign language? You continually focus on 2 singular words. Those two words are relatively unimportant in the discussion, even though those two words are an example of the ones used in studies on the effectiveness of speech reading. What about all the other words in the English language?

If speechreading is an effective tool for communication and especially for education, why is it that sign is needed in a TC classroom, or why is it that interpreters, FM systems, and CART are used in a mainstream classroom?

 

[jillio]

and how exactly does that apply to the discussion that is in disagreement with your assessment of lipreading. Those are the metrics I am taling about and also why I said (in this context). Your general answer is correct. My question is where are the metrcs that show the general population is unable to make the distinctions that others here are saying they can make.

The metrics are contained within the statistical analysis portion of numerous research documents on the topic. Likewise, results are reported in numerous articles and books.

 

[rockdrummer]

The metrics are contained within the statistical analysis portion of numerous research documents on the topic. Likewise, results are reported in numerous articles and books.

Can you be more specific please. Not asking for everything but perhaps a couple of sitings with maybe a quote from one of the numerious research documents you mentioned.

 

[AlleyCat]

Well, tell me Cheri, if lipreading is indeed as effective as you seem to believe it is, why is it that you use sign language? You continually focus on 2 singular words. Those two words are relatively unimportant in the discussion, even though those two words are an example of the ones used in studies on the effectiveness of speech reading. What about all the other words in the English language?

If speechreading is an effective tool for communication and especially for education, why is it that sign is needed in a TC classroom, or why is it that interpreters, FM systems, and CART are used in a mainstream classroom?

As Shel and I already discussed in this thread earlier, a large group setting does NOT make it easy to lipread. You have a teacher, boss, team leader, whoever that is speaking to a group as a whole and not facing you directly at all times. If we can't be seeing the lips fully we will not catch every word. That's when sign language and other aids come into play. But in one-on-one situations (and even some small group settings,) for those of us who possess lipreading skills, we certainly can see distinctions you -- as a hearing person -- are telling us we can't. How else have we done lipreading tests without any context, prior knowledge, or sound? This is ridiculous and insulting to all of us who have just told you we can see certain distinctions.

 

[jillio]

Can you be more specific please. Not asking for everything but perhaps a couple of sitings with maybe a quote from one of the numerious research documents you mentioned.

Go to an academic data base, pull up professional journals devoted to otolaryngology, deaf education, speech pathology, communication disorders, etc. and bookmark the articles that address these concerns. Read the abstracts, and if they appear to fit your needs, request the PDF or full text article. Read the full article, including methodology and statistical analysis sections, as well as results and discussion, and then critically analyze what you have read in order to pinpoint strengths and weaknesses of the research design, and then, based on those strengths and weaknesses, look for additional research that will address such.

Synthesize the knowledge and apply it to various actual situations.

That is the method I use.

 

[imdeafsowhat]

Jiro, I look at the pronuncation and I mimic. I even understand it when it goes like "jee-ro". The e is short, and the o is long.

Also, who the heck would think Elephant ears looks like I love you, THATS' WHERE YOU'RE WRONG.

It's Olive Juice that is similar to I love you.

Vacuum is similar to fuck you.




ANYMORE?

 

[Cheri]

As Shel and I already discussed in this thread earlier, a large group setting does NOT make it easy to lipread. You have a teacher, boss, team leader, whoever that is speaking to a group as a whole and not facing you directly at all times. If we can't be seeing the lips fully we will not catch every word. That's when sign language and other aids come into play. But in one-on-one situations (and even some small group settings,) for those of us who possess lipreading skills, we certainly can see distinctions you -- as a hearing person -- are telling us we can't. How else have we done lipreading tests without any context, prior knowledge, or sound? This is ridiculous and insulting to all of us who have just told you we can see certain distinctions.

That's correct, AlleyCat. It's most effective if we have access to both, so nothing will not be missed.

By the way.. Great post there!

 

[rockdrummer]

The metrics are contained within the statistical analysis portion of numerous research documents on the topic. Likewise, results are reported in numerous articles and books.

Can you be more specific please. Not asking for everything but perhaps a couple of sitings with maybe a quote from one of the numerious research documents you mentioned.

Go to an academic data base, pull up professional journals devoted to otolaryngology, deaf education, speech pathology, communication disorders, etc. and bookmark the articles that address these concerns. Read the abstracts, and if they appear to fit your needs, request the PDF or full text article. Read the full article, including methodology and statistical analysis sections, as well as results and discussion, and then critically analyze what you have read in order to pinpoint strengths and weaknesses of the research design, and then, based on those strengths and weaknesses, look for additional research that will address such.

Synthesize the knowledge and apply it to various actual situations.

That is the method I use.

I'll take that as a no to my request.

 

[jillio]

I'll take that as a no to my request.

Actually, it is a "yes." You asked for specifics. I gave you specific instructions for locating that for which you seek.

 

[Rio]

I voted No. The importance of language is ASL for the deaf. That's how they communicate with each other, in education it ought to be taught its part of their curriculum why remove it or ban it? English can be taught at a later time in ASL. Showing the structure and usage of English grammer as their second language. Yes, English is one of the toughest languages to be learn, I am hearing it doesn't mean I know EVERY word in the dictionary. I do come across words that I never seen before and have to look it up.

 

[rockdrummer]

Actually, it is a "yes." You asked for specifics. I gave you specific instructions for locating that for which you seek.

You are truly a piece of work.

 

[Angel]

As Shel and I already discussed in this thread earlier, a large group setting does NOT make it easy to lipread. You have a teacher, boss, team leader, whoever that is speaking to a group as a whole and not facing you directly at all times. If we can't be seeing the lips fully we will not catch every word. That's when sign language and other aids come into play. But in one-on-one situations (and even some small group settings,) for those of us who possess lipreading skills, we certainly can see distinctions you -- as a hearing person -- are telling us we can't. How else have we done lipreading tests without any context, prior knowledge, or sound? This is ridiculous and insulting to all of us who have just told you we can see certain distinctions.

Absolutely, it does, I know that not all deaf people are capable of lip reading but I have lip-read all my life since oral was my first method of communication, and of course there was A LOT of speech therapy and practice involved, but I enjoyed every minute of it because it gives me the ability to communicate with others without depending on someone to help me out all the time.

But unfortunately, there will always be some people out there who don’t believe in us or our abilities.