Originally Posted by flip

Good point, we all can define a word different. To me, oral = spoken language approach to communicating. It's hard for me to not think of the term "oralism" the moment you tell hearing parents that ASL is unhealthy as a first language for their child, and instead promote a spoken language approach to communication.


ASL is used for instructions and group chatting for everyone most of the time. Speech training is given individually, and used in one to one or group conversation depending on the skills. Many of the deaf children in bi-bi programs use a lot of speech at home and other activities in clubs or in the neighbourhood. It's interesting that increasing findings points in a direction where deaf students from bi-bi programs have better oral skills than those from oral programs(cued speech didn't seem to help a lot in those oral programs?). I think you should visit a true bi-bi program to understand what goes on in the classroom, and perhaps ask them about their experiences with cued speech. I am sure Jillio and Shel can give you some names if you truly are interested?


I have never said cued speech is bad for deaf children, and really don't care if they use cued speech or not, but you keep on saying ASL is bad for literacy. I have problems with the hostility toward ASL from you, National Cued Speech Association and AG Bell.