Quote:
Originally Posted by jillio
I said there was no longitudinal data that supports the claim that CS has a positive effect, over time, on literacy rates.
Seven studies in 40 years? Please.
And there is still considerably more research that indicates that sign and speech provide the greatest benefit to the deaf child. Likewise, this is academic, cross discipline research, not research done by oralist organizations, thus incorporating the issue of bias.
|
You asked for longitudinal data, you were provided with a sample. Read it and you will see that you have made a mistake with regards to "positive effect".
Once again, I know it's only 7 studies, but like I said before, what Cloggy was so kind to provide to you was not a comprehensive list.
There is still considerable research that CS is beneficial and you have been provided references to some of it. Whether you choose to ignore it or not is completely up to you. Likewise, the research that Cloggy provided has been "academic, cross discipline research, not research done by oralist organizations, thus incorporating the issue of bias." The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education is hardly an oralist organization.
Europe is often ahead of North America in research and incorporating different ideas so the fact that lots of it is from Europe is not surprising. Sign is not the ONLY viable option. Often with regards to leading research from Europe there is a language barrier. This prevents much of it from being incorporated into North American research.
Unfortunately anyone could supply you with mountains of viable research (such as here) and you would still be unable to admit that sign may not be the only way.
You asked for proof and you were provided it, the fact that you refuse to see it as legitimate is unfortunate but your refusal does not remove that fact that it is there and it works.