Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheri
How can you say that about TC? If you really knew me, you would think twice for making a statement like that. Now I know how hearing parents must felt when they tried to tell some of you how their child does with what method they had chosen you find every flaws in that method. I just wanted all hearing parents to learn signs too with their deaf child, I don't care if they choose oral, I know how hard it is to learn to speak lip reading, but oral does help them with good speech and good lip reader, only a little problem they will have some diffculities.
What method won't have that diffculities?
Flip- You gonna be kidding me when you say that those who prefer speech don't have any deaf friends what do you know? I have friends who are both deaf amd hearing. I'm not one of those deaf people who sticks in their little world who referred themselves "a big D Deaf" who thinks signs should be the primary language for the deaf ONLY. And disrinct themselves from the hearing community if this is how it is here, then I'm in the wrong forum. I've met some deaf people like that in every walk of life and I sure do not want to be around those people who are not very accepting and so self center.
|
Cheri, I was not talking about you personally, or any other deaf person specifically. I was talking about a philosophy. If a deaf person is capable ofdeveloping speech skills, they will most certainly do so in a TC environment. But if they are not able to develop speech skills, the TC environment will not change that fact. So TC, in and of itself, as a methodology, is not responsible for improved speech skills. Just as an oral environment will not help a deaf child that is unable to develop speech skills learn to speak. And you said yourself that deaf individuals use their vision to uinderstand speech. Bi-Bi capitalizes on that and gives them language in a completely visual mode as L1 langauge, and spoken language with visual cues as L2 langauge. It lets a deaf child use their strengths.