Deaf teachers losing jobs because of English

faire_jour said:
And you won't share them here? Why not?
Click to expand...

Why do I have to become a broken record and repeat myself knowing that nobody would listen to me anyway? That was the feeling I got so I stopped. Why bother?
 
shel90 said:
That is blantly untrue..
Click to expand...

If there is no one to talk to and nothing to listen to, why would you use it? If suddenly I was on a desert island with no ASL users, my ASL would goto the wayside, because I don't have any reason to use it or anyone to use it with. Why would a CI user be different?
 
shel90 said:
Why do I have to become a broken record and repeat myself knowing that nobody would listen to me anyway? That was the feeling I got so I stopped. Why bother?
Click to expand...

I'm listening, I'm asking.

I want to know your best ideas for integrating spoken language into a bi-bi classroom. I have an IEP in less than 2 weeks, I would love ideas.
 
faire_jour said:
If there is no one to talk to and nothing to listen to, why would you use it? If suddenly I was on a desert island with no ASL users, my ASL would goto the wayside, because I don't have any reason to use it or anyone to use it with. Why would a CI user be different?
Click to expand...
Ok..many prfoundly deaf people were able to develop fluency in English in the spoken form without CIs....how was that possible if they couldn't hear the language being spoken around them?

The answer..speech classes and reading English. Same thing for deaf children who grew up going to deaf schools. Some have excellent spoken English skills while others don't.

So with CI, HA, or none, some deaf children achieve spoken English fluency while others don't.

I can't believe I am going off topic again/

my apologies..I will stop. Slap me if I go off topic again!
 
FJ, as for ideas, I will PM u as I don't want to continue to derail this thread. Now, iam going to do errands.
 
shel90 said:
Ok..many prfoundly deaf people were able to develop fluency in English in the spoken form without CIs....how was that possible if they couldn't hear the language being spoken around them?

The answer..speech classes and reading English. Same thing for deaf children who grew up going to deaf schools. Some have excellent spoken English skills while others don't.

So with CI, HA, or none, some deaf children achieve spoken English fluency while others don't.

I can't believe I am going off topic again/

my apologies..I will stop. Slap me if I go off topic again!
Click to expand...

Just because they don't hear it, doesn't mean they were exposed to it, and given the opportunity to be around fluent users, and use it. They just weren't hearing it. They were receiving it in a different way.
 
FJ, as for ideas, I will PM u as I don't want to continue to derail this thread. Iam using my pager so I will do that when I get on computer.
 
It is also one of my major pet peeves these days.

Hearing educators testing Deaf teacher's English comprehension skills when those hearing educators should be tested on their ASL skills & Deaf Culture knowledge.

For a hearing person to test a Deaf person, IMHO, is wrong on so many levels. We should turn the tables on the hearing educators and test them on their ASL linguistics, Deaf Culture knowledge and their skills with communicating with Deaf people. This would also be so wrong on many levels but it would make people realise the sensitivity of the situation.
 
Mrs Bucket said:
It is also one of my major pet peeves these days.

Hearing educators testing Deaf teacher's English comprehension skills when those hearing educators should be tested on their ASL skills & Deaf Culture knowledge.

For a hearing person to test a Deaf person, IMHO, is wrong on so many levels. We should turn the tables on the hearing educators and test them on their ASL linguistics, Deaf Culture knowledge and their skills with communicating with Deaf people. This would also be so wrong on many levels but it would make people realise the sensitivity of the situation.
Click to expand...

Why not? I promise every single hearing teacher that my daughter had would pass with flying colors.

When they have questions about assessing a child's developing ASL, they go to the teacher who grew up using ASL as their first language. It seems logical to me.
 
Mrs Bucket said:
It is also one of my major pet peeves these days.

Hearing educators testing Deaf teacher's English comprehension skills when those hearing educators should be tested on their ASL skills & Deaf Culture knowledge.

For a hearing person to test a Deaf person, IMHO, is wrong on so many levels. We should turn the tables on the hearing educators and test them on their ASL linguistics, Deaf Culture knowledge and their skills with communicating with Deaf people. This would also be so wrong on many levels but it would make people realise the sensitivity of the situation.
Click to expand...

I am confused.... based on what some interpreters-in-training told me, seems like they ARE getting tested for their ASL skills/Deaf culture knowledge.... But then again these are interpreters, not educators, so Im not sure about that part.
 
To clarify the questions as I am sorry to confuse anyone,

Some colleagues of mine are teachers and professors, some of my professors are my friends too as well. I've grown up with them as well.

They are on the same professional length - Deaf with Deaf.

Keep in mind, they are university & college educated Deaf professors teaching us, Deaf students.
 
Reba said:
I "got it"--I just don't agree. Religion and belief in Creationism have nothing to do with whether or not one is an oralist.

Let's not forget it was "religious" men who established the schools for the deaf in America, using ASL as their primary means of communication and education. It's when the secular and political "experts" got involved in deaf education that the oralists gained power.

It was the very "scientific" AGB who promoted oralism.
Click to expand...

I agree with that. I also agree with flips posts on oralism but on this subject I disagree. I see that most pro CI/oral are also pro science/evilution etc...
Look at Graham Bell. He was an inventor, he was very pro darwin thery and breeding people like cattle. You wouldn't get a religious person doing that.
 
dreama said:
I agree with that. I also agree with flips posts on oralism but on this subject I disagree. I see that most pro CI/oral are also pro science/evilution etc...
Look at Graham Bell. He was an inventor, he was very pro darwin thery and breeding people like cattle. You wouldn't get a religious person doing that.
Click to expand...

I think religon has NOTHING to do with anything! I am from Utah, home of some of the most religous people on earth! And 95% of the kids here are manistreamed.
 
shel90 said:
There is one Deaf guy I know who is a GREAT teacher but English is his 4th language after Quebec sign language, French, ASL! To me, I think he has a LOT more to offer to the Deaf students than someone who is monolingual.

His English isnt perfect BUT he has taught students and has brought their English levels up so many grade levels that he recieved an award. He is someone I would look up than some hearing teacher who can pass the test but cant teach!

It would be a shame if he got let go because of some test that doesnt really measure his true skills as a teacher. :roll:
Click to expand...

Yes, it would be a shame. He sounds like a great teacher.
 
dreama said:
Look at Graham Bell. He was an inventor, he was very pro darwin thery and breeding people like cattle. You wouldn't get a religious person doing that.
Click to expand...

AG Bell was bent on Eugenics not Darwinism.

"You may ask why it is that with my high appreciation of this language, [sign or "gesture language" as Bell calls it] as a language, I should advocate its entire abolition in our institutions for the deaf." Deaf Heritage in Canada

I admit all that has been urged by experienced teachers concerning this this ease with which a deaf child acquires this language, and the perfect adaptability for the purpose of developing his mind, but after all it is not the language of millions of people among whom his lot in life is cast. It is to them a foreign tongue, and the more he becomes habituated to its use the more he becomes a stranger to his own country. ibid
 
Mrs Bucket said:
It is also one of my major pet peeves these days.

Hearing educators testing Deaf teacher's English comprehension skills when those hearing educators should be tested on their ASL skills & Deaf Culture knowledge.

For a hearing person to test a Deaf person, IMHO, is wrong on so many levels. We should turn the tables on the hearing educators and test them on their ASL linguistics, Deaf Culture knowledge and their skills with communicating with Deaf people. This would also be so wrong on many levels but it would make people realise the sensitivity of the situation.
Click to expand...

I hear you, but slightly disagree. I DON'T think it's necessarily WRONG for a hearing teacher to teach a deaf student, BUT, I DO think and believe that anyone teaching deaf students SHOULD have fluency in ASL linguistics, ect.

That's only fair in my mind. If we're going to test a deaf teacher's compentency in English, then it's only fair to evaluate competency in ASL for a hearing instructor.

To simplify, if you're going to test, test everyone on ALL material that is pertinent to teaching deaf students! Don't single people out and test subjectively.

That reeks of discrimination, imho.
 
faire_jour said:
How does one develop good language? You must be around fluent users, and have the opportunity to use it and see it modeled all day long. You need to have mistakes corrected naturally and go through the developmentally appropriate stages of language. Right?? How does that happen for spoken language in a bi-bi school? It doesn't. Speech is worked on for very short periods of time with varing degrees of success. Language is a whole different game. You need exposure and use to become fluent in ANY language, and that includes spoken English.
Click to expand...

Sure you are ok? Please create a new thread on those topics if you want to dicuss more folklore, so we don't have to go more off topic in this thread, ok?
 
dreama said:
I agree with that. I also agree with flips posts on oralism but on this subject I disagree. I see that most pro CI/oral are also pro science/evilution etc...
Look at Graham Bell. He was an inventor, he was very pro darwin thery and breeding people like cattle. You wouldn't get a religious person doing that.
Click to expand...

Check my reply to reba, where I admit comparing with creationism perhaps was a bad example. Still pondering on views on climate change and oralism, but that's just a wild question, nothing I know or will argue is right. Ok, my last post off topic post in this thread.
 
Back
Top