Quote:
Originally Posted by jillio
I agree that it beats oralism or ASL by themselves. And for communication purposes, TC works better in day-to-day communications than it does in the classroom. When one is communicating in a less formal environment than the classroom, one can always stop and say, "I didn't understand that. Could you please repeat?" But in a classroom, where instruction is not so dyadic, it isn't quite as effective
|
I don't know where you getting this information from but this is nowhere near the truth, how can a deaf person would not be understood when there's a sign language interpreter in the classroom with other hearing children, I have not experienced anyone who did not understand an interpreter, and deaf students have a choice to answer a question to a teacher by using their own voice or have the interpreter voice the answer to the teacher for them.
Quote:
|
. That is why I support Bi-Bi. The purpose of Bi-Bi is not just to provide a Deaf Cultural affiliation for children, which I do think is important and leads to more than pride in being deaf, but also addresses some very real social and psychological developmental needs that everyone has, but also to provide them with an atmosphere in which they learn to complete languages. That has been proven to be an advantage cognitively for all people, deaf or hearing.
|
If that was so true then tell me why bi bi program is not as popular as oral and TC? Humm?