Survey of Bi-Bi programs - Empirical Article

Status
Not open for further replies.
Angel said:
Great, I'm glad you are here to learn but please do not make assumption about the majority of deaf people who have a lack of english skills came from Total Communication since there are many deaf people from all walks of life -- oralist, cued-speech, ASL, SEE, PSE users and also varying degrees of hearing (CI users and hearing aid users) and speech, etc. came from either mainstreamed programs, Total Communication, Bi-Bi etc. Just because one program may works for one child will not necessarily work for another doesn't mean that program failed. each child is different, no child is the same.

The bottom line is there is no one-size-fits-all approach to educating a deaf child.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I've learned about the BiBI approach from someone who teaches using the method. If she says it works, then who am I to dispute her?
 
What is the reading level of deaf and hard of hearing people?

We have examined large numbers of deaf and hard of hearing students who are quite representative of those throughout the United States. When the Gallaudet Research Institute conducts large educational test standardization studies to obtain norms (percentile scores) for deaf and hard of hearing students, the data collected are used to describe students' achievement. In the last norming of a widely used achievement test, the Stanford Achievement Test, 9th Edition (Harcourt Educational Measurement, 1996), deaf and hard of hearing students aged 8 through 18 were given the test, including the Reading Comprehension subtest. The measure of reading achievement we are using is the Reading Comprehension subtest, a multiple-choice test.

It is important to note that the reading achievement is of deaf and hard of hearing students who are in school. We are not talking about adults, and we are not talking about high school graduates. (I want to clarify this point, because many people ask about adults and about high school graduates, for which we have no data.)

For the 17-year-olds and the 18-year-olds in the deaf and hard of hearing student norming sample, the median Reading Comprehension subtest score corresponds to about a 4.0 grade level for hearing students. That means that half of the deaf and hard of hearing students at that age scored above the typical hearing student at the beginning of fourth grade, and half scored below. The "median" is the 50th percentile, and is one of the ways to express an average, or typical, score. (A "mean" score, or arithmetic average, is not the same as the median.)

The technical report of the norming study (Interpreting the Scores) describes the students and details the methods used. It describes also the psychometric properties (reliability and validity) of the test when used with deaf and hard of hearing students. The norms booklet presents the test scores and is the source of the 4.0 grade equivalent score for 17- and 18-year-old deaf students in the norming sample. The norms booklet gives test score information for deaf and hard of hearing students aged 8 through 18 on the subtests Word Study Skills, Word Reading, Reading Vocabulary, Reading Comprehension, Mathematics: Problem Solving, Mathematics: Procedures, Spelling, Language, Environment, Study Skills, Science, Social Science, and Listening. Age-based percentile norms are given for Word Reading/Reading Vocabulary, Reading Comprehension, Mathematics: Problem Solving, Mathematics: Procedures, Spelling, and Language. These are the citations for these documents:

Holt, Judith A., Traxler, Carol B., and Allen, Thomas E. 1997. Interpreting the Scores: A User's Guide to the 9th Edition Stanford Achievement Test for Educators of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students. Gallaudet Research Institute Technical Report 97-1. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University.

Literacy & Deaf Students
 
Angel said:
Great, I'm glad you are here to learn but please do not make assumption about the majority of deaf people who have a lack of english skills came from Total Communication since there are many deaf people from all walks of life -- oralist, cued-speech, ASL, SEE, PSE users and also varying degrees of hearing (CI users and hearing aid users) and speech, etc. came from either mainstreamed programs, Total Communication, Bi-Bi etc. Just because one program may works for one child will not necessarily work for another doesn't mean that program failed. each child is different, no child is the same.

The bottom line is there is no one-size-fits-all approach to educating a deaf child.
Click to expand...

If one program works for one but not others.. keep this going for majority of students. do you know what happens? A massive confusion, inefficiency, and a colossal waste of budget. If standardized curriculum structure works for hearing people, so should for deaf student population.
 
Angel said:
Great, I'm glad you are here to learn but please do not make assumption about the majority of deaf people who have a lack of english skills came from Total Communication since there are many deaf people from all walks of life -- oralist, cued-speech, ASL, SEE, PSE users and also varying degrees of hearing (CI users and hearing aid users) and speech, etc. came from either mainstreamed programs, Total Communication, Bi-Bi etc. Just because one program may works for one child will not necessarily work for another doesn't mean that program failed. each child is different, no child is the same.

The bottom line is there is no one-size-fits-all approach to educating a deaf child.
Click to expand...

:gpost:
 
Jiro said:
If one program works for one but not others.. keep this going for majority of students. do you know what happens? A massive confusion, inefficiency, and a colossal waste of budget. If standardized curriculum structure works for hearing people, so should for deaf student population.
Click to expand...

Exactly. People seem to keep ignoring the fact that hearing children are as much individuals as are deaf children. Yet educational policy for hearing children is decided on what works best for the majority. It works the same way for deaf children. Only currently, we are attempting to educate deaf children not on the basis of what works best for the majority of deaf children, but what works best for the majority of hearing children.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
I disagree. I've learned about the BiBI approach from someone who teaches using the method. If she says it works, then who am I to dispute her?
Click to expand...

Ohhh...so I suppose you're not here to learn from everyone just one person?
 
Jiro said:
If one program works for one but not others.. keep this going for majority of students. do you know what happens? A massive confusion, inefficiency, and a colossal waste of budget. If standardized curriculum structure works for hearing people, so should for deaf student population.
Click to expand...

Thank you! :gpost:
 
Jiro said:
that's why there are special school/program for that and/or private lessons and/or home tutoring. What about for hearing student who is "slow"? same thing.
Click to expand...
So the kids that don't fit your model are now considered slow.
 
Angel said:
Ohhh...so I suppose you're not here to learn from everyone just one person?
Click to expand...

well Shel and Jillio deal with hundred of students per year. So yea - who are we to dispute that? Who knows better on what works, what doesn't work? Them as teachers.... or us as bystanders?
 
Jiro said:
If one program works for one but not others.. keep this going for majority of students. do you know what happens? A massive confusion, inefficiency, and a colossal waste of budget. If standardized curriculum structure works for hearing people, so should for deaf student population.
Click to expand...


Where did I say "others"? I said another
 
Originally Posted by Oceanbreeze View Post
I disagree. I've learned about the BiBI approach from someone who teaches using the method. If she says it works, then who am I to dispute her?
Click to expand...

That is very poor reasoning. I was oral all the way. I am pretty much able to put my thoughts down, so I could argue that that is the best because it worked for me.

Of course I am still learning ASL as an adult and I don't have much of a social life, but since I am literate (or close to it) I could argue for the oral method.

But someone else could dispute it when a different method worked for them.:hmm:
 
jillio said:
Exactly. People seem to keep ignoring the fact that hearing children are as much individuals as are deaf children. Yet educational policy for hearing children is decided on what works best for the majority. It works the same way for deaf children. Only currently, we are attempting to educate deaf children not on the basis of what works best for the majority of deaf children, but what works best for the majority of hearing children.
Click to expand...
Good luck with the major paradigm shift that seems to be going against conventional wisdom. I am anxious to see how the story ends. I truly wish you luck.
 
rockdrummer said:
No, One size doesnt fit all means that there is no single best way to educate a deaf child. There is more discussion on that topic here
http://www.alldeaf.com/deaf-education/48346-deaf-education-one-size-does-not-fit-all.html
Click to expand...

Why do you continue to insist on using the word "all" when we are talking about what works for the "majority"? No one disagrees that one approach will not work for all, just as one approach will not work for all hearing children, all Down's Syndrome children, all Autistic chidren, all LD children, and all cognitively impaired children. However, there are methods that work for the majority.
 
Angel said:
Great, I'm glad you are here to learn but please do not make assumption about the majority of deaf people who have a lack of english skills came from Total Communication since there are many deaf people from all walks of life -- oralist, cued-speech, ASL, SEE, PSE users and also varying degrees of hearing (CI users and hearing aid users) and speech, etc. came from either mainstreamed programs, Total Communication, Bi-Bi etc. Just because one program may works for one child will not necessarily work for another doesn't mean that program failed. each child is different, no child is the same.

The bottom line is there is no one-size-fits-all approach to educating a deaf child.
Click to expand...

:gpost:!!

Also, It is not a big surprise that some hearing people don't sign very well, but deaf people do not mock at their signing skills, it beats not knowing signs at all, right? ;)
 
rockdrummer said:
So the kids that don't fit your model are now considered slow.
Click to expand...

it's not my model. There are handful of standardized tests like SAT, IQ, and GEDs that ALL states share. If one does not pass SAT and/or GEDs (or high school)... what does that tell you? if the person scores below IQ of 100... what does that tell you? Either he's just slow or he's just not too bright. Everybody lives in different states, have different lifestyle, have different etc. etc. How are we supposed to deal with that on national scale? That's why there's something called - "Standardized" ------. Insert any word in ------- such as test, requirement, guideline, etc.
 
rockdrummer said:
So the kids that don't fit your model are now considered slow.
Click to expand...

Stop with the intentional misinterpretation. A cognitively impaired student does not fit into the majority of students. You know it, I know it, Jiro knows it, and anyone reading this post knows it.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
I disagree. I've learned about the BiBI approach from someone who teaches using the method. If she says it works, then who am I to dispute her?
Click to expand...
Exactly. Nobody has the right to dispute something that works. Now apply that same logic to other methods that work.
 
rockdrummer said:
Good luck with the major paradigm shift that seems to be going against conventional wisdom. I am anxious to see how the story ends. I truly wish you luck.
Click to expand...

And what conventional wisdom would that be? That an orally based education is best for deaf children despite the fact that literacy rates have been at a disgustingly low point for the last 25-30 years? BTW, I supplied you with support for those statistics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top