Why can't we have Deaf Ed like this in the US?

[CSign]

Hard if hearing kids do need spoken language support. The deaf school isn't the place for that...for deaf culture reasons. In these cases, there should be specialized programs for kids who benefit from spoken language.

In my opinion, some deaf/hard of hearing kids benefit from spoken language skills. But ALL kida can benefit from ASL.

I agree with you. It is for some of those reasons why we made the choices we made.

Can you expand on what you mean by, "for culture reasons"? Is it because individuals who are Deaf don't generally utilize spoken language as ASL doesn't require it?

 

[Beowulf]

com·pe·tent/ˈkämpətənt/Adjective
1. Having the necessary ability, knowledge, or skill to do something successfully.
2. (of a person) Efficient and capable.
Wikipedia Dictionary.com

Takes the fun out of it, doesn't it? Still not a word I would use.

 

[CSign]

Takes the fun out of it, doesn't it? Still not a word I would use.

I'm not sure what you mean by that, "takes the fun out of it".
What word would you use to convey the same message?

 

[posts from hell]

Takes the fun out of it, doesn't it? Still not a word I would use.

nod.

 

[Beowulf]

I'm not sure what you mean by that, "takes the fun out of it".
What word would you use to convey the same message?

Certainly not one that would imply incompetence to those who are not happy with the signing.

 

[jillio]

The thing is, we need to tweak bi bi so that it can be compatible with also developing spoken language, as an option is what I meant to say.
I think we have reached the point where dhh kids can become fluent in both ASL and speech concurrently.

Bi-bi is compatible with developing a spoken language along with ASL. That is what "bi" means.

 

[jillio]

Personally, I wish deaf education would eliminate teaching spoken language skills altogether. Speech is overrated and deaf people, no matter how hard they try, will never fully master it. Believe me, I've worked so fucking hard to have speech like hearing people...and what so I get? "Are you German...you have an accent.". I get to hear my four year old kid correct me on punctuation and articulation. I become more self-conscious and always feel I'm never good enough. I do believe in exposure to spoken language to use speech reading skills and cue speech to learn the visual representation of morphomes and all that...but only for literacy purposes. Deaf Education needs to get brass balls and really start realizing that deaf kids can and will master English if they are fluent in American Sign Language (or the deaf language of their country such as Auslan). If teachers are fully trained in bi-bi methods (many are not). If they would start the kids at the deaf school from the beginning instead of mainstreaming them only for them to fail and end up at the deaf schools with major gaps and delays. If they would eliminate the stupid and irrelevant requirements of NCLB. And if they would develop appropriate assessments for deaf/hh kids. And if they would provide parents with the support tey need in order to be advocates for their children.

I personally agree with this. Too much academic time is wasted putting kids in pull out for speech therapy. They are in school to learn academics, not how to speak. If it is that important to a parent that their child have speech therapy, then it needs to be provided as an adjunct service, not during academic school hours. They would be far better off spending that time becoming bilingual than focusing on speech skills.

 

[jillio]

Folks have mentioned that deaf schools are becoming hard of hearing friendly. This concerns me...it should be DEAF friendly. Hard of hearing kids benefit from social skills, exposure to ASL, and deaf education practices for instruction. I have many kids who have a lot of residual hearing and who prefers to speak rather than sign. They like to hear the instructions rather than watch the instructor sign in ASL. Usually they are rusty signers. What do we do? They still have the right to have full access to instruction. What I'm finding is a lot of places bend over backwards to accommodate hh kids...sometimes at the expense of the deaf kids who need exclusive ASL.

I also am seeing some trends. HH kids who don't sign but are placed at the deaf school do not have great speech skills ( although they think they do). Often, they have severe behavior issues. Often are delayed in reading and writing. So for me, I'm like..spoken language didn't do shit for them. They are missing out. Time for ASL.

Agreed, again. The more we focus on catering to the needs of the parents that insist on spoken language skills as a part of the curriculum, the weaker the educational environment becomes.

 

[jillio]

What a waste of two hours of quality education time. Guess we got to keep the parents happy. *walks on eggshells*

Exactly. It is not about what the kids need, it is about what the parents want.:roll: And it would appear that most parents are perfectly fine with sacrificing academics to speech.:roll:

 

[jillio]

"Nearly all of our oral pupils become competent signers due to interaction with signing adults and friends in the signing classes."

"Competent???" It is not a competition, for crying out loud. A few hearing people wrest control of deaf children and see what we get. It is pathetic and it won't be long before they get slammed in court.

Competent is not good enough. They need to be fluent. To be more exact, they need to have native fluency so they can transfer those skills to learning English. Most oral students are no more than competent in English, as well. And it shows in their use of language, their writing skills, and their literacy.

 

[jillio]

I have a question. Why the heck are we settling for "competent" from our deaf students, when we should expect, and know they are capable of "excellence" when their needs are properly addressed?

We short change our deaf students by accepting "competent" as good enough, or the best they are capable of.

 

[CSign]

com·pe·tent/ˈkämpətənt/Adjective
1. Having the necessary ability, knowledge, or skill to do something successfully.
2. (of a person) Efficient and capable.
Wikipedia Dictionary.com

The implication was not that they are lowering the standards. The implication is that they become proficient in spoken language and sign language. I see nothing wrong with that. If a child is DHH, and has the ability to develop spoken language so be it. If spoken language is not in the Childs future, then that's fine too. It depends on the individual.

 

[deafbajagal]

I agree with you. It is for some of those reasons why we made the choices we made.

Can you expand on what you mean by, "for culture reasons"? Is it because individuals who are Deaf don't generally utilize spoken language as ASL doesn't require it?

To clarify, my latest spew of my views in this thread is based on what deaf education should be...the ideal placement options. Unfortunately, too many mainstreamed programs do not operate to meet the needs of children with hearing loss...thus the deaf school may be the better option. It's dangerous for me to generalize, which I openly admit I did do in this thread. One deaf school in particular is so shitty that it really needs to be closed down or have a serious makeover from the top to bottom...I wouldn't recommend any child to go there. Unfortunately, public schools in that state aren't doing their part either. Kids are screwed. Ideally, however, deaf schools are supposed to be specialized to tailor to the complex needs of deaf children. Now it is becoming more and more tailored to needs of parents, community, and the states' legislation. Professionally, I'm not allowed to voice my opinions as I have done here.

Placement for kids really is a case by case thing.

Deaf culture examples...one I can think of is that hard of hearing kids who do not sign but prefers to speak often will not sign in the presence of deaf kids...which impacts social issues, causes rift between kids, opens door for bullying tactics, etc.

 

[CSign]

To clarify, my latest spew of my views in this thread is based on what deaf education should be...the ideal placement options. Unfortunately, too many mainstreamed programs do not operate to meet the needs of children with hearing loss...thus the deaf school may be the better option. It's dangerous for me to generalize, which I openly admit I did do in this thread. One deaf school in particular is so shitty that it really needs to be closed down or have a serious makeover from the top to bottom...I wouldn't recommend any child to go there. Unfortunately, public schools in that state aren't doing their part either. Kids are screwed. Ideally, however, deaf schools are supposed to be specialized to tailor to the complex needs of deaf children. Now it is becoming more and more tailored to needs of parents, community, and the states' legislation. Professionally, I'm not allowed to voice my opinions as I have done here.

Placement for kids really is a case by case thing.


Deaf culture examples...one I can think of is that hard of hearing kids who do
not sign but prefers to speak often will not sign in the presence of deaf
kids...which impacts social issues, causes rift between kids, opens door for
bullying tactics, etc.

.

I agree with you about placement being case by case, or varies depending on the individual needs.

I also agree it would be inappropriate for a DHH student to go to a School for the Deaf if they were unwilling, or disinterested in using sign language- which would be a fundamental matter of respect.

 

[CSign]

I think in order for schools for the Deaf to really succeed in the long term, and also for HH students to succeed there needs to be a happy medium. Not necessarily compromising the integrity of ASL, but perhaps having some classes on campus that use TC/Sim-com for students who are also working on developing spoken language. Still have majority of classes instructed in ASL, but it would be beneficial for HH students to still have access to spoken language to help with their acquisition of spoken language.

I do believe though, that each student would need to make a commitment to signing- even if they are using their voice.

I think a program/school that has both available would serve the needs of DHH students well. Not only would they have complete access to their academics/social time, but they would have peers with similar needs.

This is all off the top of my head, but I do feel that a program like that (with some adjustments) would stand the test of time.

 

[deafbajagal]

The school I currently teach at is considering the options you mentioned. Since the public schools are typically not doing what they are supposed to, I'd rather have the hh kids at the deaf school whereas such options as you mention would be available. I still feel that in many cases the instruction that emphasizes spoken language skills attribute to further delays. I also am realistic and realize that it's not going away...so I'd rather have a separate program for those skills. My child is a good example...she's really more like a hearing person because she has perfect hearing in one ear and near perfect speech. However, she had language delays and expressive issues...luckily we used intensive intervention and she's nearly up to par with her peers. She prefers to speak...but at one time I was concerned that she may have an expressive language disorder. If she did, spoken language may not have been an avenue for her. Where would we have placed her? Thank god I don't have to address that...but some parents do. So, options like the ones you mentioned would be good.

 

[Grummer]

It has always puzzled me. As well as the "English first, ASL later" philosophy. It just does not make sense.

me too, it should be the other way around!, ASl provides cognition recognition at instant speeds, then English can be taught thru ASL...speech , last or jsut forget it, its only geared towards the convenience for the hearing. stuff them.

 

[Grummer]

Exactly. It is not about what the kids need, it is about what the parents want.:roll: And it would appear that most parents are perfectly fine with sacrificing academics to speech.:roll:

guess what, i have known this all my life, seriously i knew this even when i was very young say 7 years old, i was forced to believe they were right but when i look at the rest of classmate (yes i was those oral ones) i was puzzled but same time i knew it was all about learning to talk first then school work comes next, thats why i spoke because i didnt wanted to end up in dad's mental hospital if i cant talk, didnt have school, meaning i cant work im not joking i knew that
so im saying here, it was from the time when 'alternatives' to sign did not existed and yet we deaf kids KNEW how to sign to each others 'as in school/home signs' i dunno...that bit id never know how or why, maybe its the side effect trickle down from the other school in the city (it was a full deaf school)..

the morals of my post here is
never underestimate the kids curiousity or messages, Evrn so the ones 'wants to talk they could be doing this for that same reason as i did...

 

[Grummer]

this is like black kids in the neighbourhood, some of them (or more of them in the earlier days?) would act out, ,mimick to be like white kids because there was nothing else (black cultures suppressed)..in so saying black kids knew they werent white and knew the parents nieghbourhoods aren't the same as the white counterparts but nevertheless they acted white (in secret hope they'd be given the same chances later, as investment for adulthood) , in a way its investing to a different kind of cultural capital, no It IS cultural capital when concerned with hegemony...

its like that

 

[BecLak]

down with oral education.

This program is nothing new. Nor is it the direction deaf ed in the U.S. needs to be moving. It needs to be moving into a bi-bi area, not backwards into a TC area. And we already know the problems with sign supported English and all of the MCEs when applied to cognitive processing of language.

Totally agree with your both, Post from Hell and Jillio. English and ASL should never be used at the same time. Never.

Agree. All dhh children should have access to and be taught in genuine Sign languages, such as ASL, Auslan, BSL etc., both at home and at schools. English should be taught as a second language, but not orally. It should be taught in its written form only.