Should ASL be Banned from Deaf Ed programs?

Should ASL be banned from Deaf Ed?

  • Yes

    Votes: 5 8.3%

  • No

    Votes: 53 88.3%

  • Not sure

    Votes: 2 3.3%

  • Nuetral

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    60
Status
Not open for further replies.
shel90

shel90

Love Makes the World Go Round
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2006
Messages
45,078
Reaction score
335
It seems that I am getting the feeling that ASL is blamed for a lot of literacy problems but nobody has really said it right out...should ASL be banned from all Deaf ed programs?

U dont have to post here..just vote.

I just see a lot of negativity against ASL as being the root of literacy problems so I was curious.

For me, I think ASL really enchances literacy development and higher thinking skills in deaf children.
 
You didn't have "absolutely and most definately not!" so I just voted "no.":giggle:
 
Oralist and CI supporters are usually the groups who are against ASL being taught to deaf children.

I say hell with them and burn them to the stake!
 
I voted no.

ASL is the primary communication skills. Teachers and parents need to reinforce proper grammar along with ASL. I have seen many deafs use ASL and have better grammar than a lot of hearing people.
 
Wow! 3 people voted yes...interesting.
 
I voted no, but I don't believe that ASL helps literacy in a great way.

I think children should use SEE in schools and home. Socially use ASL. They are young, and they can pick up on SEE as it is in books and English language. Even though, deaf children will take awhile to pick up on the language, and that's normal because they're not picking up language by hearing everyone out there. If people think they can do ASL, so they can do SEE. I think the deaf community is just afraid that ASL will disappear. I think that ASL is always learned by many people later as an adult when they know English first. ASL, I think, should be like a second language. I think that the saying that ASL is their natural language is bullcrap, and it says to me that people don't believe in them to learn the English language first hand.

That's my opinion and only my opinion.
 
lumbingmi said:
Oralist and CI supporters are usually the groups who are against ASL being taught to deaf children.

I say hell with them and burn them to the stake!
Click to expand...

:giggle:
 
ClearSky said:
I voted no, but I don't believe that ASL helps literacy in a great way.

I think children should use SEE in schools and home. Socially use ASL. They are young, and they can pick up on SEE as it is in books and English language. Even though, deaf children will take awhile to pick up on the language, and that's normal because they're not picking up language by hearing everyone out there. If people think they can do ASL, so they can do SEE. I think the deaf community is just afraid that ASL will disappear. I think that ASL is always learned by many people later as an adult when they know English first. ASL, I think, should be like a second language. I think that the saying that ASL is their natural language is bullcrap, and it says to me that people don't believe in them to learn the English language first hand.

That's my opinion and only my opinion.
Click to expand...

I respect your opinion but I see the opposite daily as a teacher for the deaf.
 
ClearSky said:
I voted no, but I don't believe that ASL helps literacy in a great way.

I think children should use SEE in schools and home. Socially use ASL. They are young, and they can pick up on SEE as it is in books and English language. Even though, deaf children will take awhile to pick up on the language, and that's normal because they're not picking up language by hearing everyone out there. If people think they can do ASL, so they can do SEE. I think the deaf community is just afraid that ASL will disappear. I think that ASL is always learned by many people later as an adult when they know English first. ASL, I think, should be like a second language. I think that the saying that ASL is their natural language is bullcrap, and it says to me that people don't believe in them to learn the English language first hand.

That's my opinion and only my opinion.
Click to expand...


i concur. After all, the english speaking world we live in IS english and not ASL. IF americas primary language was ASL then you should be able to toss SEE signing concepts out the window. Unfortunatly its not. Now, i understand its a more complicated version of signing and thats why that wasnt the path that was chosen since the deaf rely on emotion and visualization that IS the foundation of ASL but it should definatly be encouraged in schools. Just my 2 cents.
 
I voted NO!

It has proven ASL used as the best early intervention tool for the deaf children to learn English than any other methods taught that I have seen and was told so far.

Deaf's most strength sense is the EYE! Therefore start with the visual language the first thing... that is natural thing like a gene.
 
Only if the ASL or sign languages is/are banned, I don't want my future kids to go in the "go back to oral system" crappy schools. I am just go for homeschool instead. :roll:

I voted NO. Deaf students deserve both spoken and sign languages, my opinion...
 
shel90 said:
Wow! 3 people voted yes...interesting.
Click to expand...

I think we know who voted 'yes' but can't call out due to alldeaf's policy of calling out members. Already got a warning from mod :roll:
 
dead money said:
i concur. After all, the english speaking world we live in IS english and not ASL. IF americas primary language was ASL then you should be able to toss SEE signing concepts out the window. Unfortunatly its not. Now, i understand its a more complicated version of signing and thats why that wasnt the path that was chosen since the deaf rely on emotion and visualization that IS the foundation of ASL but it should definatly be encouraged in schools. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...

SEE is not more complicated...it is just more cumbersome. And, it uses artificial signs and English syntax that make sense when processed auditorily, but do not make sense when processed visually. It creates a confusinglinguistic environment and prevents a child from having accurrate models of any language. Likewise, much research into the actual practice of programs stating that they use SEE for instruction has found that SEE is not the mode used in practice, but a PSE is used in practice.
 
Not at ALL.
The reason for the poor test scores is SIMPLE......it's basicly a second language. Deaf kids approach English as a second language. You see a lot of the same acheivement issues in "bilingal" (actually limited English) programs!
 
I voted no.

I do not beleive that speaking itself improve literacy problems but reading and writing. I see no excuse to blame ASL for lead literacy problem because million hearing people have the problem with literacy.

Sign language only helps you understand, that´s all.




 
I am going to be brief here and that applies for the aussie people as well. I voted 'no flippin' way' and that ASL and AUSLAN must be madandory to make sure both worlds are communicated within each other. Why with the ban? It is just pointless.

Just IMHO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top