Why - Why the Medical Society constantly pressure on the Parents?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kalista said:
Look at me... I raise oral method at Deaf School. Tell me why my English grammar do not always accurately structure when I write / type ?? ASL expose is more developed in better concept in my primary language than oral skill.

Tell me why my voice sounds like a monkey ??
Click to expand...


Too much time in speech therapy, right? What a waste of your education and I dont blame u for your feelings towards oralism. My reasons for my feelings towards oralism are different from yours.
 
Kalista said:
Look at me... I raise oral method at Deaf School. Tell me why my English grammar do not always accurately structure when I write / type ?? ASL expose is more developed in better concept in my primary language than oral skill.

Tell me why my voice sounds like a monkey ??
Click to expand...

Your voice in your opinion sounds like a monkey because you cannot hear your own voice so you cannot correct. Now I am not saying there is something wrong with how you talk, I am just explaing to you why it sounds like that.
 
flip said:
I can relate to this from university. While we had our share of dizzy students bilingual or monolingual, those who did worst, was they who had lousy signing skills, and of course, some of them was very oral and focused on hearing people. Some student with good speech did well, but they could express themselves clearly in ASL or PSE(or SEE), too. I suspect the lousy sign skills are due to language deprivation or weak language functions in the brain from birth(how do I say this in a non-insulting manner?), making it hard for them to learn another language and catch up at university level as well.

This is what makes oralism a really luck and go game. If there is a group of deaf people who can't become bilingual for a reason, I would say the best best choice for them is early ASL for the sake of their adulthood.
Click to expand...

Both of my children are being raised orally. My daughter signs a lot better then my son and her writing skills are bit worst then his but I am not blaming the fact that her signing skills are better then his.
 
flip said:
I can relate to this from university. While we had our share of dizzy students bilingual or monolingual, those who did worst, was they who had lousy signing skills, and of course, some of them was very oral and focused on hearing people. Some student with good speech did well, but they could express themselves clearly in ASL or PSE(or SEE), too. I suspect the lousy sign skills are due to language deprivation or weak language functions in the brain from birth(how do I say this in a non-insulting manner?), making it hard for them to learn another language and catch up at university level as well.
This is what makes oralism a really luck and go game. If there is a group of deaf people who can't become bilingual for a reason, I would say the best best choice for them is early ASL for the sake of their adulthood.
Click to expand...

That is the most common issue with those kids who got referred to our program at an older age. Even learning ASL at our program, their ASL is full of errors due to their language delays from being in an environment where language wasnt made fully accessible for them.

Now, try to imagine them achieving fluency in literacy skills? However, some of them do make it despite all the obstacles they had been faced. It is just too bad cuz everything has been made extremely difficult for them when it didnt have to be in the first place.
 
jackiesolorzano said:
Your voice in your opinion sounds like a monkey because you cannot hear your own voice so you cannot correct. Now I am not saying there is something wrong with how you talk, I am just explaing to you why it sounds like that.
Click to expand...

Yes that is correct. :D
 
jackiesolorzano said:
Both of my children are being raised orally. My daughter signs a lot better then my son and her writing skills are bit worst then his but I am not blaming the fact that her signing skills are better then his.
Click to expand...

I think I read somewhere that females statstically have a bit easier time learning another language, so this sounds spot on:) I am happy they don't have big issues with learning a new language, as that skill can come in handy if the CI's someday stop to work or they want to venture deeper into the deaf community.
 
flip said:
I can relate to this from university. While we had our share of dizzy students bilingual or monolingual, those who did worst, was they who had lousy signing skills, and of course, some of them was very oral and focused on hearing people. Some student with good speech did well, but they could express themselves clearly in ASL or PSE(or SEE), too. I suspect the lousy sign skills are due to language deprivation or weak language functions in the brain from birth(how do I say this in a non-insulting manner?), making it hard for them to learn another language and catch up at university level as well.

This is what makes oralism a really luck and go game. If there is a group of deaf people who can't become bilingual for a reason, I would say the best best choice for them is early ASL for the sake of their adulthood.
Click to expand...

Yes, flip, it does have to do with language deprivation. A child who suffers language delays may very well still be able to speak well, but they have not internalized the functions and use of language. All too often, a child who speaks well does not receive necessary services to make up for those delays, because th crong criteria is being used for assessment. A first grader in an oral environment may very well be able to speak well, and the langauge delays that cause problems in academic functioning do not show up until 4th grade, for example, when the curriculum gets harder and it becomes obvious that despite a good vocabualry,they are unable to use that vocabulary in the ways which facilitate learning. Then, they ar provided sign language. But because the difficulites with internalized language are already present, and are not addressed, these problems transfer over into their use of ASL as well. What we end up with is a child that is stilted in language in both English and ASL due to early deprivation.
 
shel90 said:
That is the most common issue with those kids who got referred to our program at an older age. Even learning ASL at our program, their ASL is full of errors due to their language delays from being in an environment where language wasnt made fully accessible for them.

Now, try to imagine them achieving fluency in literacy skills? However, some of them do make it despite all the obstacles they had been faced. It is just too bad cuz everything has been made extremely difficult for them when it didnt have to be in the first place.
Click to expand...

Bingo!
 
jillio said:
Yes, flip, it does have to do with language deprivation. A child who suffers language delays may very well still be able to speak well, but they have not internalized the functions and use of language. All too often, a child who speaks well does not receive necessary services to make up for those delays, because th crong criteria is being used for assessment. A first grader in an oral environment may very well be able to speak well, and the langauge delays that cause problems in academic functioning do not show up until 4th grade, for example, when the curriculum gets harder and it becomes obvious that despite a good vocabualry,they are unable to use that vocabulary in the ways which facilitate learning. Then, they ar provided sign language. But because the difficulites with internalized language are already present, and are not addressed, these problems transfer over into their use of ASL as well. What we end up with is a child that is stilted in language in both English and ASL due to early deprivation.
Click to expand...

And the numbers are just too big for me to accept. Maybe the oralists accept that as long as a few kids succeed. :roll:
 
shel90 said:
And the numbers are just too big for me to accept. Maybe the oralists accept that as long as a few kids succeed. :roll:
Click to expand...

It would certainly seem that way. **sighs**
 
shel90 said:
And the numbers are just too big for me to accept. Maybe the oralists accept that as long as a few kids succeed. :roll:
Click to expand...

You might think that just a few kids succeed but it's not, it is so many that you just have a hard time accepting it.
 
jackiesolorzano said:
You might think that just a few kids succeed but it's not, it is so many that you just have a hard time accepting it.
Click to expand...

Do you have any stats on that? And please define success, because obviously you are using a different operational definition than the educational researchers and state depts. of ed use. That 4th grade reading level that is combined for deaf students includes those educated in oral mainstream programs, as well. As a matter of fact, since the move toward mainstreaming, more students attend oral mainstream schools than deaf schools. Yet the literacy rates are not going up. So why aren't these numerous oral successes raising the stats?
 
That 4th grade reading level that is combined for deaf students includes those educated in oral mainstream programs, as well. As a matter of fact, since the move toward mainstreaming, more students attend oral mainstream schools than deaf schools. Yet the literacy rates are not going up. So why aren't these numerous oral successes raising the stats?
Click to expand...
THANK YOU jillo!
I see this a LOT with parents who are pro-oral. They think that the reason why literacy rates with dhh kids are so low is b/c of ASL and other "traditional" deaf ed interventions. They see the very high achievers who are rather promeniet in the oral deaf organizations, and they think that ALL oral kids can acheive as well as those kids.
I'm not surprised that you see a lot of high achiever types.........but the thing is, its not nessarily due to methodology...........it's due to the fact that many if not most AG Bell types are basicly very high achiever types. (and high achiever for ANYONE)
 
deafdyke said:
THANK YOU jillo!
I see this a LOT with parents who are pro-oral. They think that the reason why literacy rates with dhh kids are so low is b/c of ASL and other "traditional" deaf ed interventions. They see the very high achievers who are rather promeniet in the oral deaf organizations, and they think that ALL oral kids can acheive as well as those kids.
I'm not surprised that you see a lot of high achiever types.........but the thing is, its not nessarily due to methodology...........it's due to the fact that many if not most AG Bell types are basicly very high achiever types. (and high achiever for ANYONE)
Click to expand...

YW.
 
jillio said:
Do you have any stats on that? And please define success, because obviously you are using a different operational definition than the educational researchers and state depts. of ed use. That 4th grade reading level that is combined for deaf students includes those educated in oral mainstream programs, as well. As a matter of fact, since the move toward mainstreaming, more students attend oral mainstream schools than deaf schools. Yet the literacy rates are not going up. So why aren't these numerous oral successes raising the stats?
Click to expand...

Not all children who are deaf or hoh have IEPs and that data would not be available. If they are mainstreamed without accommodations then there is not record on testing that they are deaf. If you have any state data, since I can't find any, please give a link.
 
jackiesolorzano said:
You might think that just a few kids succeed but it's not, it is so many that you just have a hard time accepting it.
Click to expand...

and yet it is ok for so many to continue to be deprived of a llanguage? That is my whole point. I dont think that is ok.

What is "success" anyway? Remmy what another ADer said about being so successful but inside, she was dying. There could be many of those who feel that way but nobody knows it. Deaf kids are so good at fooling people around them on what is going on with them inside.

Again for the 100th time, some of my friends and I grew up orally only without any exposure to sign language and we all wish we had sign language in the educational setting. Would have made learning so much easier and more fun for all of us. Yet, we were considered "successes" because we kept quiet about our suffering inside.
 
jillio said:
Do you have any stats on that? And please define success, because obviously you are using a different operational definition than the educational researchers and state depts. of ed use. That 4th grade reading level that is combined for deaf students includes those educated in oral mainstream programs, as well. As a matter of fact, since the move toward mainstreaming, more students attend oral mainstream schools than deaf schools. Yet the literacy rates are not going up. So why aren't these numerous oral successes raising the stats?
Click to expand...

Where are your stats? Back up your claim, and there is a difference between a child in a mainstream setting such as my daughter who receives all of her instruction orally as opposed to the child in my other daughter's class who receives all of her instruction through an ASL interpreter. Same school, same program two very different ways of receiving that instruction. So again, show us the stats.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top