02-03-2008, 05:44 PM
|
#469 (permalink)
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,277
|
Quote:
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.
|
flip - Again, I do not present Cued Speech as oralism, understand please that you need not voice when you cue. ASL is unhealthy, unhealthy, honestly you take this to an odd level.  Do you agree that ASL is a foreign language? Do you agree that the learning of ASL can/is a difficult venture for some/most hearing families?
I promote a system that gives visual, kinesthetic and some auditory(although of course not always the case), for hearing parents to use as an early intervention tool with their deaf child. For you somehow this is a bad thing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by flip
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?
|
flip - I am fimiliar with the programs locally that call themselves "bi/bi". As I have said before, nice on paper, but not necessarily the "real deal". Frankly flip, the child needs to have access to language way before they get to school. The language of their family from their family and ASL from a Deaf role model fluent in ASL, preferably.
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.[/quote]
flip - Certainly reads that way for me.  I habour no hostility toward ASL, a language cannot in and of itself be bad.
__________________
Quote:
|
....Cued Speech has substantial data showing that it enables deaf children to attain competency in English at the level of hearing students grade by grade. I know of no other system that enables this to happen.... As more and more young deaf persons achieve academically because of this system, deaf leaders will need to re-examine their options.
|
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet
|
|
|