Survey of Bi-Bi programs - Empirical Article

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cheri said:
They both are important not one over another. I've said that for the million of times already.
Click to expand...

In order for someone to develop language, they have to have access to it.

Hearing children develop spoken language without difficulty, because they have full access to it. They can hear themselves babbling. They can hear Mommy or Daddy pronouncing words or babbling back to them. A deaf can't hear that. They will only develop language either visually, or if they have enough residual language to develop spoken langauge. If a deaf child doesn't have the residual hearing to develpe speak, then they MUST have a visual language to compensate. If they aren't tought how to sign during the critical time of language aquistion, they won't learn EITHER language.
 
Tousi said:
Oh, from THAT perspective, okayyyyy. I was thinking of Mankind; the cave guys and gals grunted their way to spoken language first before sign language was what I was thinking, lol...
Click to expand...

for the hearing yea spoken language I was talking about deaf children not hearing children. :confused:

Never mind if you guys are just going to mock at me forget it, I'm done. Laters. :)
 
Bottesini said:
Yes, but that was not the interpretation at the time. Hindsight is 20/20.
Click to expand...

It is still evidence that supports the usefulness of a bi-bi method today. Anything relies on previous research to guide current research. The didn't know that the mold growing on bread was a useful antibiotic at first, either. But they do now.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
In order for someone to develop language, they have to have access to it.

Hearing children develop spoken language without difficulty, because they have full access to it. They can hear themselves babbling. They can hear Mommy or Daddy pronouncing words or babbling back to them. A deaf can't hear that. They will only develop language either visually, or if they have enough residual language to develop spoken langauge. If a deaf child doesn't have the residual hearing to develpe speak, then they MUST have a visual language to compensate. If they aren't tought how to sign during the critical time of language aquistion, they won't learn EITHER language.
Click to expand...

Agreed! Even getting exposed to ASL at an older age as a last resort, their ASL are weaker than those who had ASL from the start. Doesnt matter if the child is from a hearing or a deaf family. I have seen this too numerous times to count and the research I have used in this thread and countless of other research I used when studying for my degree showed the same conclusions.
 
Tousi said:
Oh, from THAT perspective, okayyyyy. I was thinking of Mankind; the cave guys and gals grunted their way to spoken language first before sign language was what I was thinking, lol...
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
Bottesini said:
To early investigators who observed such delays (e.g., Pintner &
Patterson, 1916, 1917), it often appeared that the lack of spoken language was
the cause of academic and intellectual challenges

The bolded part is what I referred to that Jillio misused.

Edit: I pasted since could not bold twice
Click to expand...

I did not misuse it at all. Earlier research was cited in the article to support the validity of conducting cuirrent research. It is done in all fields. It is standard practice to cite earlier research to support the need for the research being reported in the current article. In fact, it is mandatory to do so when writing the proposal.

But, if you want to get technical, we can go back even further than 1916 to the 19th century when Abbe deL'Eppe claimed the same thing based on his observations of hands on experience in educating deaf children.
 
The Brazilian article sources that was posted earlier in this thread is it one sided source? the reason why I'm asking cause I can not seem to find it through google. :dunno:
 
shel90 said:
Agreed! Even getting exposed to ASL at an older age as a last resort, their ASL are weaker than those who had ASL from the start. Doesnt matter if the child is from a hearing or a deaf family. I have seen this too numerous times to count and the research I have used in this thread and countless of other research I used when studying for my degree showed the same conclusions.
Click to expand...

I know of a little girl who was born deaf. She's six and has an implant. As soon as she was identified as deaf as an infant, her parents learned ASL and tought her. When she was implanted at around a year old, she was already a proficient signer. After implantation, they continued to sign with her and they also did AVT to maximize the use of her implant. At age six, this child can speak and sign. I've seen her switch from spoken language to sign effortlessly. She's also on or above grade level in a mainstream school with accomodations. I absolutely adore this little girl. She's such a joy to watch. She's also been known to correct me in my attempts to use ASL. :giggle:
 
Cheri said:
The point is, it seems to me that educators were no clearer on the best way to teach deaf, since deaf people were mute during the 19 centuries ago, Then sign language became forbidden and the oral teaching method was adopted, then cued speech, then TC, and now Bi-Bi, the same old debates continue. At this point no one approach has been proven to be more effective for the majority of deaf.
Click to expand...

One fallicy in your argument. Not all deaf people were mute in the 19th century.
 
Jiro said:
lol i'm just saying it's better to provide studies about deaf education from year of 2000 or so. 1990's studies are just simply too outdated and so much has changed... in terms of awareness, technology, new understanding, etc. No doubt that we're so much better off than deaf people in 1990's.
Click to expand...

Research fromt he 1990's is still valid. And, if deaf students are so much better off, why aren't literacy rates indicating that improvement?
 
jillio said:
One fallicy in your argument. Not all deaf people were mute in the 19th century.
Click to expand...

You're attacking something that's not there, she did not say ALL.
 
Angel said:
The Brazilian article sources that was posted earlier in this thread is it one sided source? the reason why I'm asking cause I can not seem to find it through google. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Bilingual in Deaf Education in the South of Brazil. 1367-0050/04/05 368-13 $20.00/0 # 2004 C. Skliar & R.M. Quadros
BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM Vol. 7, No. 5, 2004

It costs $20 to purchase it. That's why it is not available for free on the Internet. Have to pay for it to get access to it.
 
jillio said:
Research fromt he 1990's is still valid. And, if deaf students are so much better off, why aren't literacy rates indicating that improvement?
Click to expand...

Oral only or using a "smorgasborg" approach instead of a clear, well defined approach like Bi-Bi?
 
Daredevel7 said:
My favorite line in the conclusion of that article: "Intellectual functioning of deaf adults and children: Answers and questions"

"For those interested in intelligence and the relations of verbal and nonverbal
processes, deaf individuals have always presented a puzzling case."

We are so puzzling! oooo! We are mysterious!
Click to expand...

You might be interested in the book, Psychology of Deafness, by Marschark, et. al. He has published the results of several studies that use testing for cognitive functioning that are accepted and widely used in the field. He conducted these tests on deaf individuals and then compared the results to the same tests conducted on hearing individuals. The consequence was, he was able to identify many strengths in cognitive functioning in deaf individuals, as well as differences in the processing of hearing and deaf individuals.

I had a few minutes between teaching an into psych course and going to a class myself. I am off again, but you can be sure I will return later to address the other points brought up in the discussion.:giggle:
 
Angel said:
You're attacking something that's not there, she did not say ALL.
Click to expand...

Some lines from Cheri's posts...

since deaf people were mute during the 19 centuries ago, #339

nobody had taught those deaf to speak during the time ASL was around #354

Then tell me why were the deaf children didn't speak? why were they mute?? #356

if she wanted to put an emphasize that she didnt mean all, then it is important to put "some" in those statemetns or otherwise it would mean she is saying "all" indirectly.
 
shel90 said:
Bilingual in Deaf Education in the South of Brazil. 1367-0050/04/05 368-13 $20.00/0 # 2004 C. Skliar & R.M. Quadros
BILINGUAL EDUCATION AND BILINGUALISM Vol. 7, No. 5, 2004

It costs $20 to purchase it. That's why it is not available for free on the Internet. Have to pay for it to get access to it.
Click to expand...

:eek3:
 
Angel said:
:eek3:
Click to expand...

That's why Jillo cant search for research articles everytime someone requests it...it is expensive. She is glad to charge people a fee if they want her to find all the research and pay the fees in obtaining them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top