Start with spoken language or ASL?

[jillio]

!!!!

I'm so glad there's someone who has brains on this forum.

How about if you cease with the personal insults, Cheri? It does nothing to substantiate your postion, and everything to substantiate the position of the other side.

 

[jillio]

you make it sound like i love my own voice or something. This is how i look at it. You can have excellent cognitive skills, excellent problem solving skills, excellent writing skills. All without saying a thing. However, i find it hard to believe that it works the other way around. A deaf child who has excellent speaking skills right off the bat, it seems to me they are more likely to have good developmental skills in everything else. No?

no.

 

[Daredevel7]

How exactly do you propose to do that? You keep talking about testing potential, and you have yet to come up with any definitive way to test for potential. The experts have yet to come up with any definitive method that can test for potential to develop spoken language. If yopu know of a way to test a deaf infant for spoken language potential, please enlighten us to that procedure. I'm certain that all professionals in the field would love to know exactly how this can be done, and how results can be predicted.

Would it have mattered if I came up with a procedure anyway? You will simply say that I do not have the research/statistics to back me up. You keep relying on "the experts", and yet you dismiss the very same "experts" who say to teach speech. There are "experts" who say oralism first and there are "experts" who say ASL first. You know why? Because they PERSONALLY experience more success with one method they are employing. Shel90 is PERSONALLY experiencing more success with her (or her program's) method of ASL first. My speech therapist is PERSONALLY experiencing more success with her method of oralism first. I can ask her how she knew that oralism is meant for me. In fact, I'll email her and tell you her response, because I'm curious myself.

 

[jillio]

Please allow me to clarify something that i have actually failed to mention in these posts. These deaf children that i use in examples, MUST have binaural amplification (i.e. hearing aids) or cochlear implants (or both). Both hearing and deaf babies do babble, yes. If the deaf baby is fitted with HA/CI, then it is VERY important to reinforce speech!! because how do hearing babies learn to speak? by babbling and repeating whats said to them. As soon as the deaf baby - WITH HA/CI - begins this phase, the better!
The way to insure this, Jillio, would be to have that child implanted with fitted with hearing aids AS SOON as they're diagnosed with a hearing loss. and making sure theyre getting the BEST out of their hearing instrument.... otherwise what was the point of getting it?
Now, if this child does NOT have a CI or HAs, then yeah.. ASL is the way to go with him/her.
if the kid does indeed have some kind of amplification in the ears, then... USE the hearing s/he has. learning to truly USE that hearing, and to its fullest, really is in the best interest of the child.

And once they are fitted with amplification, they must engage int herapy to learn to use that amplification, and to remediate the delays that have occurred prior to amplification. You don't just fit a hearing aid or a CI and have the child know aiutomatically how to make use of the newfound auditory input they are receiving. Are you suggesting that we continue to deprive them of language during that time?

ASL does not preclude being able to learn to process auditory input from amplification. It assists them in learning exactly how to apply that input, and to make sense of that input. Why in the world would you deprive a chiold of that? Why would you undertake a method that actually makes it more difficult for them to grow and develop congnitively and linguistically on an age appropriate schedule? Is speech so important that we are willing to accept the inevitable consequences of keeping a child in an aural only environment at the very real risk of creating cognitive impairment and delay?

 

[Cheri]

They are all still deaf children. Why should they be placed at an automatic disadvantage simply because they have hearing parents?

You keep forgetting that every deaf child is an individual who will responds differently to different methods. If someone will do a totally neutral study, you'll find that there is no best approach for the whole deaf population. I don't see it in the studies that Bi Bi was the best approach out of all the others. Only that it was a successful program so far.. so far.. so far.. so far.. still there are not enough bi bi programs out there. You can't force people including hearing parents to put their children in a bi bi program just because you believe this program works better for the deaf population.

 

[jillio]

Cheri, u are so right in that. thanks for being blunt!

The answer to Cheri's question is quite obvious. People are more concerned about promoting an ethnocentric attitude toward language and making deaf children appear to be more hearing than they are about the education and development of the deaf child. That is obvious throughout this thread.

 

[jillio]

Just like Jillo listed all the different skills deaf kids can be put at risks for delays by not having full access to language. I will go back and look for it.

They won't pay any more attention to it the second time around than they have the first. :roll: They conveniently ignore anything except the issue of speech.

 

[jillio]

What makes you so sure that it has nothing to do with your program being more supportive? It seems to me that even though we may disagree on some issues, you (or your program) go the extra mile for your clients, and I do believe that reinforcement and great support for the child is a HUGE key to their development. My mom and my speech therapist went the extra mile for me, not just doing their job, and I feel that it made such a huge difference.

Of course a bi-bi program is more supportive. It supports language development, social development, and psychological development through the use of a language that is readily accessable, processed visually utilizing the inherent strengths of the deaf child, provides deaf role models and peers that they can communicate with, and addresses the deaf child's needs from the deaf child's perspective. A bi-bi program supports the child across all domains. Find me another program that does that.

 

[Daredevel7]

They won't pay any more attention to it the second time around than they have the first. :roll: They conveniently ignore anything except the issue of speech.

Just as you ignored anything concerning speech? You've quite made it seem like speech the most unimportant thing in the world for deaf people. Also.... isn't what this thread is about? Oralism? You're fighting about the Bi-bi program vs ____ program. We are talking about whether oralism first is significant or not.

 

[jillio]

I have many deaf friends who grew up with ASL who have decent oral skills and excellent literacy skills.

As do I. In fact, I happen to be related to one. Another is a co-worker with a master's level degree in education, currently a post-doc. And that doesn't even begin to include the number of deaf people I have formed friendships with and have come in contact with over the last 20 years.

The deaf teachers at my son's school were all master's level educators. All were native signers. You cannot even claim that level of education in the public schools with hearing teachers.

 

[Cheri]

Just as you ignored anything concerning speech? You've quite made it seem like speech the most unimportant thing in the world for deaf people.

 

[jillio]

I don't know. that is unfortunate that he was so behind. maybe it has to do with lack of GOOD speech therapy and/or parents reinforcing those skills? his personality? my hearing is WAY worse than that boy's, however my reading skills were WAY ahead for someone my age.
seems like a # of outside factors contributed to his delays, not the fact that he was started orally.

let me ask this... if starting orally is not the best way to go, then how do u explain how the lot of us who are totally oral and successful. How did that work?

The same way that you explain any other phenomenon that lies outside the majority. Outliers.

How do you explain 2 hearing children with different levels of actual functioning despite having the same tested assessments of ability?

 

[jillio]

Isn't that the point of a bibi education? One size does not fit all, this way they can get the best of both...

Exactly, samanthasmom! Such a very simple concept. I have no idea why it is that people continue to complicate it. Well, I do know, but refrain from using the word here.

 

[jillio]

Yes but according to Shel90 and Jillio, the wait and see approach takes years? Or at least thats the impression I got.

The wait and see approach normally does take years. Children are quite often 8, 9, 10 years old before they fall so far behind that the parents and the educators are placed in such an obvious position of admitting the dealys and difficulties these children are experiencing. Anything less than years, and the attititude is, "Just give him/her a little more time. They'll get it. They are just trying to make up for lost ground."

 

[Daredevel7]

As do I. In fact, I happen to be related to one. Another is a co-worker with a master's level degree in education, currently a post-doc. And that doesn't even begin to include the number of deaf people I have formed friendships with and have come in contact with over the last 20 years.

The deaf teachers at my son's school were all master's level educators. All were native signers. You cannot even claim that level of education in the public schools with hearing teachers.

I'm probably going to be attacked for saying this but.... it seems to be there is a disproportionate number of higher education deaf people in terms of majors. It seems to me that a lot of them are studying deaf education which allows them to stay in the ASL world. I find absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to teach deaf children and expand the education for deaf people. In an ideal world, there should be the same demographics in deaf college as in a hearing college. Lets say that 10% of hearing college people want to be teachers, shouldn't there be also 10% of deaf college people who want to be teachers? It seems that it's not the case, and the reason why I'm bringing this up is because it may be evidence that deaf people use ASL as a clutch.

 

[jillio]

My daughter was diagnosed severe/profound at birth. HAs at 3 mos with INTENSIVE speech therapy. First implant at 15 months (earliest we could get it approved at the time) Mainstreamed in pre-school at 2.5 years of age. Oral only. She was recently implanted on right side - July. As yet has not bridged gap from hearing age to chronological. Who would have guessed?! Had we not been told that ASL would delay her speech and we had done both, who knows what the outcome would be...Point is, we were dissuaded from ASL. Is that right? The same time frame - huge push to teach hearing kids to sign for faster language acquisition...?

Exactly. And as result, your job as a parent, and her job as a developing child has been complicated in untold ways. It is much easier to prevent the delays with adequate provision of language than it is to correct them.

 

[Daredevel7]

The wait and see approach normally does take years. Children are quite often 8, 9, 10 years old before they fall so far behind that the parents and the educators are placed in such an obvious position of admitting the dealys and difficulties these children are experiencing. Anything less than years, and the attititude is, "Just give him/her a little more time. They'll get it. They are just trying to make up for lost ground."

Using this logic, you're blaming the parents (who are in denial), not the idea of oralism.

 

[jillio]

Great that ASL worked for you and your brother. Oral English worked for me. I'm all for Bi-Bi approach, AS LONG the deaf child does not refuse to learning how to speak because ASL is easier. Obviously, I want each child to be able to reach his/her full potential.

I have this friend who came to me because she heard about my job and wanted to talk to a deaf person OTHER than her own deaf friends. This friend is from the same speech therapist I had. She learned to speak and was mainstreamed like me. She did well in high school (all hearing). Then she went to college and met other deaf people and decided to learn ASL to take advantage of the interpreters and to be able to communicate with her deaf friends. Sounds great! However, she started to realize that her deaf friends are warning her "If you do too well in college, you won't be able to get a disability check." They had such low faith in themselves in terms of getting a job after college due to a lack of oral skills, so they had to depend on getting a disability check. I am worried about people like this. They had the language and other skills to go to college, but..... obviously they couldn't go further than college because of a lack of oral skills.

That is the whole point. You and the others seem to be unwilling or unable to comprehend the fact that Bi-Bi does not preclude the development of spoken language.

 

[jillio]

I was born with 85-95 dB loss in both ears. Is this not deaf enough? Don't say that oralism won't work PERIOD. Oralism most likely will NOT work for those who are severely profound. Therein lies the difference.

Historically, and for the large majority of deaf individuals, oralism does not work. If it worked for you, great. But hisotrically, and for the large majority of deaf individuals, oralism has not worked. However, I'm sure that A.G. Bell would be happy to use your singualr example as proof that it does. In that way, they can continue to perpetuate a system that actually handicaps deaf children far more than their deafness ever has.

 

[jillio]

Can I ask how this works? How do you sign to someone telling them how to speak? Do they sign "Move your tongue like this"? I really do have a hard time grasping the concept of using sign to tell them how to speak. I understand associating a sign with a spoken word, but using signs for the act of speaking itself? Not sure how this works?

There is the problem. You really have no information at your disposal regarding that which you propose to argue against.