Survey of Bi-Bi programs - Empirical Article

[shel90]

I think this thread has served its purpose a long time ago. We will just continue to beat the dead horse until there is nothing left.

Agree to get this thread locked?

 

[web730]

I think this thread has served its purpose a long time ago. We will just continue to beat the dead horse until there is nothing left.

Agree to get this thread locked?

Yes, absolutely!

No use to go any further debating on this thread since like you said it already has served its purpose.

Maybe till later in other threads whenever it come. lol

 

[Cheri]

I think this thread has served its purpose a long time ago. We will just continue to beat the dead horse until there is nothing left.

Agree to get this thread locked?

It's up to rockdrummer since he's the creator of this thread. We can't say to lock this thread just because we gave up.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Yes, absolutely!

No use to go any further debating on this thread since like you said it already has served its purpose.

Maybe till later in other threads whenever it come. lol

It's served it's purpose. Lock 'er up!

 

[web730]

I think Rockdrummer, this thread creator has to agree or disagree to close her thread on her request?

 

[shel90]

I think Rockdrummer, this thread creator has to agree or disagree to close her thread on her request?

(his)

Up to him. I feel I gave my reasons, citations, and experiences on this subject. I have nothing else left to give.

It would be a waste of my and everyone's time, if I keep repeating myself. I am ready to move on.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

(his)

Up to him. I feel I gave my reasons, citations, and experiences on this subject. I have nothing else left to give.

It would be a waste of my and everyone's time, if I keep repeating myself. I am ready to move on.

Exactly. I feel the same way. I'm repeating myself at this point.

 

[shel90]

It's up to rockdrummer since he's the creator of this thread. We can't say to lock this thread just because we gave up.

Just asking if we agreed..if not, then I probably wont post in here anymore cuz I feel there is nothing more I can say about this subject.

We all have our beliefs so I think we pretty much understand where we all are coming from. If not, oh well.

 

[web730]

Yep, understood!

Only one post I was hoping for rockdrummer (him tks) to reply my post #724.

But ofc, it's up to him answering that before he opts to close this thread or not.

Thanks for the great debate, posters!

 

[jillio]

Honestly, the reason I nearly chose TC for my daughter was because of the oral component. I want my child to learn to speak. It is as simple as that. The bi-bi school put very little emphasis on spoken language and that made me unhappy. Parents don't choose TC because they believe the status quo is ok, the TC programs offer them something they don't feel like they can get from bi-bi.

Which, in effect, leaves them with the status quo; placing speech before academics.

 

[jillio]

It is incredibly hard to learn to use a language you are not exposed to. A child can not learn spoken language in 2 hours a week therapy sessions.

A child is exposed to spoken language in many, many ways. Not just through speech therapy. Speech therapy is a directed expercise, and doesn't relly do much when we look at language acquisition from a peripheral learning perspective.

 

[jillio]

Ok...imagine yourself in this..


Hearing person...turn the volume off or cut about 50 % of what is being said on the tv and try to lipread everyone in the movies or shows.

Deaf people...turn the captions off on the tv and try to lipread everyone in the movies or shows?

Easy to follow or hard?

That's what happens in an oral only environment.


Now..for the TC approach...

imagine a TV show where the characters arent consistent with one language, speaking English using ASL syntax, using ASL using English syntax, using Spanish with English syntax, or using two languages at the same time, or speaking but dropping the visual language or using visual language but dropping the spoken language.

Hard to get a consistent model of the languages.

For BiBi...one language is used at a time..never mixing them up. More consistent and accurate use of language.

CS...I dont know since I need to learn it and observe it in a classroom setting.

Excellent examples, Shel!

 

[jillio]

You always talk about oral students being delayed. That's because you only see the ones who are. You don't work with the kids who are succeeding. I think that is one of the reasons you believe that oral (CI) kids aren't able to function, because everyday, all day, you see only the ones who aren't.

I know CI implanted kids in the mainstream that are considered "successful" but still require the same accommodations an HOH kid requires to gain access to the curriculum and what is going on around them in the classroom.

Virtually all of the CI implanted students I serve at the college level use a terp and a notetaker in class.

 

[jillio]

I use speech to mean both receptive and expressive spoken language skills. In AVT understanding always comes before using, therefore if a child is speaking fluently they are also accessing spoken language. They also being exposed to fluent language models at school and at home. And as we all know, a strong L1 language leads to literacy. Imagine how much easier it is when your are actually learing to read the same language.

I beg to differ that understanding always precedes use. I know a lot of toddlers that are hearing that will spit out a word that you'd really rather they hadn't used without knowing what it means at all. They are simply parroting what they have heard. The same with a CI implanted child, or a child with HAs. Just because they are able to say it does not necessarily mean they understand the word conceptually.

 

[jillio]

But a child can not access or understand print from day one. Understanding of English and phoneomic awareness leads to an easier time learning to read.

I actually posted some research a few pages back indicating that deaf children actually relied on sign lexicons when learning to read. It also showed that deaf signers, and deaf non-signers (oral) use the same cognitive processes when learning to read, and that these processes differ from the ones hearing children use.

 

[jillio]

Only when compared to children without a strong L1.

Yeah. Deaf of deaf test highest (on par with hearing counterparts), deaf of hearing signers test 2nd, deaf of hearing non-signers test lowest.

 

[jillio]

AT this point, there is nothing left to say. I do believe the majority of the research posted indicates the benefits of a bi-bi program.

 

[Daredevel7]

AT this point, there is nothing left to say. I do believe the majority of the research posted indicates the benefits of a bi-bi program.

It does show promise.

Not proof, but promise

 

[jillio]

It does show promise.

Not proof, but promise

True. But we can never ask the research or the data for proof. It can only provide support. It definately supports that the bi-bi philosophy is very promising.

 

[Daredevel7]

True. But we can never ask the research or the data for proof. It can only provide support. It definately supports that the bi-bi philosophy is very promising.

True, but evidently not enough support to enforce a nation-wide deaf education standard policy. Obviously, for this to happen, there needs to be more Bi-Bi programs....

(Sort of like a Catch 22...)