Start with spoken language or ASL?

[shel90]

I said that in order to take full advantage of using ASL, which means BOTH getting instruction and having a social circle that uses ASL, best chance is in a Deaf school. In a public school, unless you're friends with only deaf people, you will miss out things if you talk to hearing people.

That's great that Deaf schools have improved, and I applaud that. However, the reality is, the best instructors in college are not going to teach in a Deaf school. If I wanted the best education hands down I'd have to go to a hearing school, sad to say. Not to say that Deaf schools don't have a good education, but if I wanted to go to a top ranked school.... True, I can get an interpreter, but what's the point if I know spoken English?

Anyhoo, back to the topic. Are you saying that if you had a child, you would not hesitate to teach it ASL first? I doubt learning ASL first does not hinder learning spoken English AT ALL. I mean if I learned Spanish first, I'd definitely be delayed in learning English, especially if everyone spoke Spanish to me.

My son learned ASL first...he is fluent in it at the age of 2. Getting delayed in language development is the worst thing and that happens to so many deaf children.

Even as an oral deaf kid being maistreamed, I was isolated among my hearing peers anyway so there was no point for me to interact with them if I was going to be left out all the time due to not being able to keep up with everyone is saying.

Deaf schools are starting to offer magnet programs with public schools for the high school kids to take classes at a nearby public school if they chose to do so.

 

[Daredevel7]

While things change in practice from one situation to another, let me ask you all a theoric question. If the infant is profoundly deaf but has access to best of all teachers both experienced in teaching ASL and teaching deaf kids English, and these teachers are available to him 24/7, so there is no lack of neither quality nor time/attention limitations of the education , what would be the easiest language to learn for this infant?
-

This seems to have an easy answer: simply ASL because it's easier. However you are only accounting UP until the end of school. What happens afterwards? The child has learned ASL his WHOLE life, then bam whammo? Out in the real world?

 

[Daredevel7]

My son learned ASL first...he is fluent in it at the age of 2.

Thats great! Is he deaf?

 

[shel90]

Thats great! Is he deaf?

No, he is hearing. But he has a deaf friend the same age and she learned ASL first too and she is surpassing his language level by one year. She can express herself using sentences while my son cant.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

I know some people are pro-ASL and most people have no problem with deaf people speaking. However, I am curious as to what people would do first when they have a baby born deaf. Would they try to teach him/her spoken language first, and if it is too difficult, then try to teach ASL to gain vocabulary? Or would you rather spare the child the difficulty of learning spoken language and go straight to teaching ASL? Assuming parents are both hearing, and willing to do whatever it takes to communicate with their child.

If it was me and my child, I'd start with ASL and add spoken language. Not every deaf child can pick up spoken language, so it makes sense to start with ASL. Even if the child is able to have access to spoken language, they'd be in the best possible position with command of BOTH languages.

If possible, I'd like my child to be bilingual. If not that, at least they'd still be able to communicate.

 

[Daredevel7]

No, he is hearing. But he has a deaf friend the same age and she learned ASL first too and she is surpassing his language level by one year. She can express herself using sentences while my son cant.

I am not doubting the language powers of ASL. I mean, I am not saying that ASL delays deaf people. What I am asking is, if the deaf child has the CAPABILITY to be mainstreamed early, would you take that chance to teach him/her spoken English? It seems to me that deaf children learn ASL to build up a vocabulary right? Then they derive from this vocabulary to learn spoken English. Then they either get mainstreamed or go to a deaf school. Whereas if you learned spoken English in the first place, you already know how to speak and have a vocabulary and can get mainstreamed earlier, or they can choose later on to learn ASL and go to a deaf school or one of those programs you mentioned.

 

[shel90]

I am not doubting the language powers of ASL. I mean, I am not saying that ASL delays deaf people. What I am asking is, if the deaf child has the CAPABILITY to be mainstreamed early, would you take that chance to teach him/her spoken English? It seems to me that deaf children learn ASL to build up a vocabulary right? Then they derive from this vocabulary to learn spoken English. Then they either get mainstreamed or go to a deaf school. Whereas if you learned spoken English in the first place, you already know how to speak and have a vocabulary and can get mainstreamed earlier, or they can choose later on to learn ASL and go to a deaf school or one of those programs you mentioned.

Of course, that's why I support the BiBi method..using ASL and English, both in the spoken and written forms. No way I believe in removing any opportunities for the children to learn oral skills.

I dont believe in having one or the other. Just only spoken English or only ASL.

 

[shel90]

If it was me and my child, I'd start with ASL and add spoken language. Not every deaf child can pick up spoken language, so it makes sense to start with ASL. Even if the child is able to have access to spoken language, they'd be in the best possible position with command of BOTH languages.

If possible, I'd like my child to be bilingual. If not that, at least they'd still be able to communicate.

Right, that is what I advocate for. :P

 

[doofenslim]

I was mainstreamed too orally too and I didnt have full access to everything like my hearing peers did. If u find that ok, your perogative but to me that is not ok.

Nope, ASL does not interfere with the development of spoken language nor the development of literacy skills.

I have seen so many children with severe language delays because they didnt have full access to language during their early years and were referred to ASL as a last resort and because of the language delays, their ASL is weak along with their literacy skills.

I used to believe the exact same thing as u did 15 years ago. Until I saw it myself first-hand as a teacher, my views changed.

Can you hear and understand everything being spoken around you all the time like hearing people do?

Sounds like you have a lot of build up anger to what happened to you years ago.

I attended mainstreamed programs and did not have any problems. I ended up in honor classes just fine.

I will never be fluent in ASL because the window of opportunity for native language acquisition is closed at five years old and didn't pick up ASL until my teens. I don't have a problem with it.

 

[doofenslim]

My son learned ASL first...he is fluent in it at the age of 2. Getting delayed in language development is the worst thing and that happens to so many deaf children.

Even as an oral deaf kid being maistreamed, I was isolated among my hearing peers anyway so there was no point for me to interact with them if I was going to be left out all the time due to not being able to keep up with everyone is saying.

Deaf schools are starting to offer magnet programs with public schools for the high school kids to take classes at a nearby public school if they chose to do so.

I had different experience in mainstreamed programs, I was not isolated and pretty well-known in school. I was aggressive and got myself involved in everything I could.

 

[rockdrummer]

I said that in order to take full advantage of using ASL, which means BOTH getting instruction and having a social circle that uses ASL, best chance is in a Deaf school. In a public school, unless you're friends with only deaf people, you will miss out things if you talk to hearing people.

That's great that Deaf schools have improved, and I applaud that. However, the reality is, the best instructors in college are not going to teach in a Deaf school. If I wanted the best education hands down I'd have to go to a hearing school, sad to say. Not to say that Deaf schools don't have a good education, but if I wanted to go to a top ranked school.... True, I can get an interpreter, but what's the point if I know spoken English?

Anyhoo, back to the topic. Are you saying that if you had a child, you would not hesitate to teach it ASL first? I doubt learning ASL first does not hinder learning spoken English AT ALL. I mean if I learned Spanish first, I'd definitely be delayed in learning English, especially if everyone spoke Spanish to me.

Not true according to research. Visit this thread http://www.alldeaf.com/deaf-educati...-american-sign-language-english-literacy.html and you will find some discussion and resources on the topic. Also I would suggest that you review some of the research in the Oxford journals on deafness and deaf education where I trust you will find much that suggests the contrary to what you said. Oxford Journals | Medicine | Jnl. of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

 

[Daredevel7]

I also did not have that experience of feeling isolated. There is a difference between missing out things and feeling isolated. I never felt like I couldn't count on my peers. I never felt like I couldn't count on my teachers (most of who never met a deaf person before me). I never felt like I didn't know what was going on in classes even though I missed out a lot of things. However, as I am typing this, I feel like I am saying "Oh I did perfectly fine in mainstream school and you didn't!" Honestly, to me, feeling isolated in high school..... chances are that it has nothing with you being deaf. One of my friends HATED high school and she felt so out of place and so isolated... guess what? She isn't deaf or didn't have any other disability. Some people just hated high school or even college.

 

[Hermes]

This seems to have an easy answer: simply ASL because it's easier. However you are only accounting UP until the end of school. What happens afterwards? The child has learned ASL his WHOLE life, then bam whammo? Out in the real world?

I am not accounting anything , I am learning.

Ok , another question, how soon speech therapy is supposed to start if we want kid to be able to speak ? Well I know as soon as possible but let me reverse the question, how late is too late?

-

 

[Daredevel7]

Not true according to research. Visit this thread http://www.alldeaf.com/deaf-educati...-american-sign-language-english-literacy.html and you will find some discussion and resources on the topic. Also I would suggest that you review some of the research in the Oxford journals on deafness and deaf education where I trust you will find much that suggests the contrary to what you said. Oxford Journals | Medicine | Jnl. of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

This is a direct quote from what you gave me
"Using a specially designed test of ASL to determine three levels of ASL ability, we found that deaf children who attained the higher two levels significantly outperformed children in the lowest ASL ability level in English literacy, regardless of age and IQ."

To me, that only implies that deaf children who are better in ASL are better in spoken English. But... this does not prove that they would learn spoken English at the exact same rate in those 2 scenarios I mentioned: Learning Spoken English first only vs Learning ASL first only (or even learning ASL AND English at the same time). I am talking about TIME. Yes ASL can help with learning spoken English, but at what time cost? Hence the delaying I was talking about.

 

[Daredevel7]

I am not accounting anything , I am learning.

Ok , another question, how soon speech therapy is supposed to start if we want kid to be able to speak ? Well I know as soon as possible but let me reverse the question, how late is too late?

-

I can tell you that I started speech therapy when I was 3 years old. Im asking, why not try out speech therapy for spoken language for several months or even a year, and see if they at least progress, then if not, ASL then? I know some people said "why not BiBi?", the thing Im apprehensive about is that since ASL is so much easier than speaking, why would the child do both equally?

 

[shel90]

This is a direct quote from what you gave me
"Using a specially designed test of ASL to determine three levels of ASL ability, we found that deaf children who attained the higher two levels significantly outperformed children in the lowest ASL ability level in English literacy, regardless of age and IQ."

To me, that only implies that deaf children who are better in ASL are better in spoken English. But... this does not prove that they would learn spoken English at the exact same rate in those 2 scenarios I mentioned: Learning Spoken English first only vs Learning ASL first only (or even learning ASL AND English at the same time). I am talking about TIME. Yes ASL can help with learning spoken English, but at what time cost? Hence the delaying I was talking about.

What delays? If a child is capable of learning spoken English, he or she will be able to accomplish that at the time frame they r ready for. It is the lieracy skills, reading and wrting that we do not want to delay. I have a student who learned ASL first and didn't pick up on spoken English until like 5 or 6 and now she is 9 years old and using both languages equally and can switch to either languages just fine now. Her reading is on grade level and her writing is picking up pretty fast and she is learning the wrting process now and will apply that knowledge when writing.

Many of my deaf friends have pretty good speech skills and they grew up going to deaf schools and using ASL. There r many who were mainstreamed who do not have decent speech skills.

Speech shouldn't take precedence over language andliteracy development.

 

[Daredevel7]

What delays? If a child is capable of learning spoken English, he or she will be able to accomplish that at the time frame they r ready for. It is the lieracy skills, reading and wrting that we do not want to delay. I have a student who learned ASL first and didn't pick up on spoken English until like 5 or 6 and now she is 9 years old and using both languages equally and can switch to either languages just fine now. Her reading is on grade level and her writing is picking up pretty fast and she is learning the wrting process now and will apply that knowledge when writing.

Many of my deaf friends have pretty good speech skills and they grew up going to deaf schools and using ASL. There r many who were mainstreamed who do not have decent speech skills.

Speech shouldn't take precedence over language andliteracy development.

I am not sure why you dissociated speech from language and literacy development... Doesn't speech reinforce language and even literacy development? Especially when compared to ASL? If you were talking about SEE I understand, but ASL does not have the same structure as written skills while spoken English/SEE does. When you are a child, do you learn language from communication or reading first? Obviously communication, so language builds from there. You said " If a child is capable of learning spoken English, he or she will be able to accomplish that at the time frame they r ready for." But how would you know if the child is capable of learning spoken English if you start teaching ASL first?

 

[Daredevel7]

Not true according to research. Visit this thread http://www.alldeaf.com/deaf-educati...-american-sign-language-english-literacy.html and you will find some discussion and resources on the topic. Also I would suggest that you review some of the research in the Oxford journals on deafness and deaf education where I trust you will find much that suggests the contrary to what you said. Oxford Journals | Medicine | Jnl. of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

I really appreciate the link! I found a LOT of information there! This is a good study that describes EXACTLY what Im talking about:

The Development of Spoken Language in Deaf Children: Explaining the Unexplained Variance -- Musselman and Kircaali-Iftar 1 (2): 108 -- The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

Check out Table 3 in the pdf file. See the difference in using only speech and using both speech and sign in your environment makes in a deaf child's speech? Of course, just because you don't speak well does NOT mean you are not educated, but I thought this showed evidence that trying to do BiBi does delay in spoken English.

 

[jillio]

What have I said that is "so true?" I think you just totally missed my point.

I have seen deaf children from deaf families have horrible literacy skills.[/QUOTE]

I have seen hearing children from hearing families have horrible literacy skills.

 

[jillio]

Spoken languages are not fully accessible to deaf children like it is to hearing kids because we cant hear it like hearing kids do. Even deaf children with CIs require years of intensive speech therapy to get access to spoken language so use their strongest sense..the eyes and visual language is processed thru the eyes into the brain while spoken language is processed auditorially thru the ears. If our ears dont work, it restricts access to spoken language therefore putting many deaf children at risks for language delays. Some are able to overcome the restrictions but rarely on par with their hearing counterparts.

You know, I didn't have any trouble getting my son native exposure to ASL from native signers, despite the fact that I am hearing and had never interacted with a deaf person until my son was born. I just made visits to the closest big city with a large deaf population and hung out with deaf people. Not only did my son get native exposure, I learned from the people best able to teach me ASL, as well.

We keep trying to make this so difficult, and the answers really are simple. Its just a matter of what effort you are willing to make.