CI--Deaf or Hearing?

[Cheetah]

When used properly, SEE can be a very good representation of the English language. The challenge is that some people who might use SEE don't expand their knowledge base enough to continue providing a complete language model. At that point, it trends closer to PSE/CASE which can be counterproductive for a young child acquiring language.

CSign, I do see your point that SEE is a good representation of the Written/spoken English language. However, I am not convinced that it is the best method to teach a child English.

If your argument is that hearing kids learn English language by hearing the adults speak it all day long, the the only way SEE would be beneficial is if all of the adults use SEE while they talk all day long (including when they are on the telephone because we all know where the kids pick up the "bad" words... right?)

I propose that a natural language is the best tool for teaching English. ESL (English as a second language) is often taught in the native languages. Granted I am postlingually deaf (age 3), I have found the best method of teaching English is reading and writing over and over and over again with frequent feedback. I concede that this might not be the best method for ALL deaf children. I am not an educator nor do I have any children. so... I am listening to your arguments and I will attempt to keep an open mind.

 

[CSign]

No one here is saying you (in general) should use SEE.

 

[shel90]

Shel- it's already done. It wasn't created to take away from the Deaf. It was created in an effort to adress the fact that DHH students were having a difficult time mastering English. They didn't create it to replace ASL which absolutely has it's place in this world. Also, I've met a few of the individuals who were a part of the creation of SEE and they are not Audists. They value ASL just as much as they value English.

Iam sorry..they are audist because they never took in the fact that ASL worked in the 19th century. Need to read up the ugly history of oralism and audism. SEE was a part of that history.

 

[Beowulf]

I never said a child isn't capable of learning more than one language. I said they need a complete language model in whatever language or languages they are to become fluent in.

There is a difference between a deaf child and a hearing child. The deaf child is not getting its needs met if he/she does not know ASL and has English instead.

 

[deafskeptic]

I actually agree with you, at least partially. I do think that a young child, or any child for that matter, needs a complete language model, and CASE/PSE are not complete language models. Though, I do not think that SEE is a complete language model either. It seems to me that it is a very incomplete mixture of ASL and spoken english (it uses some ASL signs, but uses English syntax) so I do not see SEE as a complete language model. I think a true complete language model for a dhh child in the US, where I am, would consist of ASL, not SEE, not CASE/PSE. ASL is a complete language model, and allows the child the best opportunities for the future, the most comprehensive language practice. It also allows the child to be able to converse with other dhh people as they get older without hindrance (and this is extremely important for the emotional and mental well being of the individual, let me tell you).

Due to the inherent awkwardness of SEE, most SEE signers will lapse into PSE and that's not good. The best way to learn English, imho, is Bi-Bi and extensive reading of books.

 

[ash345]

Due to the inherent awkwardness of SEE, most SEE signers will lapse into PSE and that's not good. The best way to learn English, imho, is Bi-Bi and extensive reading of books.

Yeah... I've seen some SEE signers... and it is very laborious... when I was deciding that I actually needed to learn sign, I had my IEP counselor tell me that I should learn SEE because it was so similar to the spoken english that I had been taught. I looked at a book and went why would any one want to sign this way? then I googled sign language, and came up with videos of ASL and videos of SEE... I chose ASL thankfully! Still getting the hang of it, but from the first couple of lessons, I could already communicate better than I had ever in spoken english... it makes so much more sense, and i'm using what i've always releyed on for communication anyway... my eyes. I went back and told my IEP counselor NEVER to suggest SEE to anyone again.

 

[shel90]

Yeah... I've seen some SEE signers... and it is very laborious... when I was deciding that I actually needed to learn sign, I had my IEP counselor tell me that I should learn SEE because it was so similar to the spoken english that I had been taught. I looked at a book and went why would any one want to sign this way? then I googled sign language, and came up with videos of ASL and videos of SEE... I chose ASL thankfully! Still getting the hang of it, but from the first couple of lessons, I could already communicate better than I had ever in spoken english... it makes so much more sense, and i'm using what i've always releyed on for communication anyway... my eyes. I went back and told my IEP counselor NEVER to suggest SEE to anyone again.

I was lucky that my first exposure to sign language was ASL not SEE. I can't understand SEE..my brain doesn't naturally process it so I have to work hard at understanding a SEE signer and I just can't sign it myself. Not natural. Just like trying to speak in ASL wouldn't be natural.

 

[jillio]

PFH, I'm contentious for challenging Csign to perform a sociology experiment to be deaf for a week.

At our local Deaf center, we have an event for ASL students in which talking is not allowed. If you talk, a Deaf person takes you to "jail." There are written tasks to challenge the students by simulating every day experiences. Great practice!

You may be familiar with the baby simulation lesson for teens. When I taught high school, the kids would put them in their lockers. Definintely not ready! lol

Exactly. What is contentious about asking someone to do an activity that would allow them to simulate the experience of another? I don't get it. It is a great learning experience for those who have difficulty putting themselves in another's shoes.

 

[deafskeptic]

I was lucky that my first exposure to sign language was ASL not SEE. I can't understand SEE..my brain doesn't naturally process it so I have to work hard at understanding a SEE signer and I just can't sign it myself. Not natural. Just like trying to speak in ASL wouldn't be natural.

Lucky you. I had a great deal of unlearning to do.

 

[jillio]

My husband has and actually broke down in tears to know that that is how life is for me. He was lost and couldn't do anything more than say, "ILY, sorry, start my coffee please, and thank you". He felt so inadequate. It only took him 1 day. He is unable to do it while at work, but mentioned it to a lot of co-workers who now have a better appreciation for what I go through.

It is really an eye opening experience. Like I said earlier, you encounter situations that you never would have considered as a hearing person.

 

[jillio]

I don't think plugging their ears for a week will make them understand. They have all the years of hearing experience, and know how it works.

They will go through the week, then think "that was easy, what are they complaining about."

I am here forever, and I can see it is far different and easier for them.

You do have a point. Some people just are not open to a learning experience and will get nothing from it.

 

[Jiro]

I would disagree with you on this point that CASE is a good representation of English. If one already has a solid command of English, then I see nothing wrong with using CASE (Conceptually Accurate Signed English- it's really the same thing as PSE, just a more PC name I suppose). However, if it is a child building on their language then a complete language model needs to be used. Whether it be ASL or English, they need a complete representation of a language. Not a schmorgesborg of 2 languages combined, compromising the integrity of both.

When used properly, SEE can be a very good representation of the English language. The challenge is that some people who might use SEE don't expand their knowledge base enough to continue providing a complete language model. At that point, it trends closer to PSE/CASE which can be counterproductive for a young child acquiring language.

That's what I was saying. CASE/PSE are not complete models of any language. That's why I wouldn't want a young child acquiring language to have consistent exposure to it. They need a complete language model.

Shel- it's already done. It wasn't created to take away from the Deaf. It was created in an effort to adress the fact that DHH students were having a difficult time mastering English. They didn't create it to replace ASL which absolutely has it's place in this world. Also, I've met a few of the individuals who were a part of the creation of SEE and they are not Audists. They value ASL just as much as they value English.

I see that there's no convincing you otherwise because you must have conferred with experts and such on this subject which led you to decide on SEE to use with your son.

May I ask what is your SEE skill level so far now? and how long have you been signing for?

 

[jillio]

Well..... you may have noticed that plenty of people writing here DO f***k up the English language to meet their agenda. There is a whole thread on "Grammar" which is basically a tribute to ignorance and why should anyone be concerned about grammar anyway, and so on and so forth.

Do you think grammar and correct usage should be equally as important in ASL as in written English? Or vice versa, perhaps I should say?

What I'm getting at is that just as written English seems to be difficult for some people, perhaps correctly signing ASL is difficult enough for others that they use SEE instead, which apparently is easier. Is that really a problem, or is it just a shortcut that meets a temporary need?

If it is difficult, then work harder. The issue is that SEE, or any of the MCE's create a confusing linguistic environment for deaf children, and as a consequence has a negative impact on their language development, and the development of cognitive domains dependent upon language. (Which is all of the cognitive domains when you come right down to it.) I could go into a lengthy explanation as to why the MCE's create confusion, but I have already done so numerous times. Those who need to learn ignore the information. Leave it to say that English grammar difficulties is more often the result of having been placed in a confusing linguistic environment than it is the result of anything else.

You may not consider this a vital issue. However, for those of us that are concerned with the needs of deaf children, it most definately is a vital issue because these negative impacts will affect that child academically and psycho-socially, most often for the rest of their lives.

 

[jillio]

Sure.

It also concerns me when people think they can screw up written English and then say "oh, who cares if I can't spell, can't write correctly, can't put together a correct sentence, it's only those mean ol' grammar Nazis who care."

If you want people to use correct ASL, I applaud that, as I applaud correct usage in whatever language people are using.

Then maybe you need to join a grammar forum.:roll: When you join a forum that has a preponderance of members that are prelingually deafened, you are going to see, in black and white, the negative impact of the educational policies and the linguistic decisions made by parents. Instead of being so judgemental and snobby about it, you should be attempting to understand those things that are responsible for it. Not everyone has the advantage of being late deafened and acquiring language on an appropriate time table. But even very few of the late deafened here are as judgemental and snobby as you come across.

 

[jillio]

ASL is a complete language.
English (visually supported with Signing Exact English) is a complete language.
PSE/CASE is not a complete language.

SEE is not a language. SEE is a mode, and therefore cannot be classified in any way, shape or form, as a language. What part of that don't you understand?

 

[jillio]

I'm not going to respond any further to this question besides this. I've already made it clear in the other thread that has been referenced multiple times what I use with my child, and what my plans are with my child.

I can assure you though, my son and I have no problem communicating or understanding eachother whether his HA's are on or off.

That is not the issue. Give it time. The problems created by a confusing linguistic environment will begin to show as he gets older. By then, it is too late. Be prepared to deal with the consequences of your decision and your need to satisfy your needs over the priority of your son's needs.

 

[jillio]

When used properly, SEE can be a very good representation of the English language. The challenge is that some people who might use SEE don't expand their knowledge base enough to continue providing a complete language model. At that point, it trends closer to PSE/CASE which can be counterproductive for a young child acquiring language.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. SEE takes that which in intended to processed aurally (English syntax) and attempts to make it something that can be processed visually. That is impossible to do simply by placing signs with words and not changing the syntax. ASL syntax developed the way it did for visual processing.

The challange is to get people to understand that the visual and the aural are processed differently in the brain, and the MCEs do not account for that. ASL does. That is why the MCEs provide a confusing linguistic environment for the child.

You, like so many hearing parents, have just enough information and comprehension of the issues to be dangerous. And the saddest part is, you think you are an expert on the issue.:roll:

 

[shel90]

SEE is not a language. SEE is a mode, and therefore cannot be classified in any way, shape or form, as a language. What part of that don't you understand?

It is another example of telling the Deaf that they are wrong. Nothing new.

 

[deafskeptic]

It is another example of telling the Deaf that they are wrong. Nothing new.

Yep. :roll:

 

[jillio]

Excuse me...I would never encourage taking English and screwing it up on pruprose. Those who you are referring you DO want to write proper English. Pls don't imply that I support poor grammar for deaf/Deaf people.

This is about the audists who purposefully messed up with ASL to suit their agenda. Now, that's wrong and disrespectful.

Not only that, it is harmful to the language development and the cognitive development of deaf children.