Dual Language Immersion

missywinks

missywinks

New Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
596
Reaction score
0
5 Reasons to Love Dual Language Immersion Programs | TakePart - Inspiration to Action


Are we, Deaf people, behind the times? Would a new, catchy phrase such as "Dual Language Immersion" be more attractive to parents of deaf and hard of hearing kids? Would it give ASL the "catchet" of a second language like Mandarin or Cantonese or French, etc.that many families want for future employment opportunities? :hmm:
 
Hello everyone,

ASL already has cachet as a second language. It is somehow more “cool” to learn ASL then it is to learn, say, French. If someone sees me signing they often ask “Where did you learn to sign. That’s so cool!” But if someone hears me speaking French, there is no excitement or even curiosity. This cachet is also evident in the lucrative business of Baby Sign classes.

It seems to me that the real problem is that no one values ASL as a first language. The article states that a person becomes more fluent in English if they first learn how to read and write in their first language. Should this not be the same for Deaf kids?

Until schools, parents, doctors and audiologists and all of the other so-called experts start to value ASL as a first language, I’m not sure that changing the rhetoric (from bilingual to dual language), is going to make much of a difference.

Just a thought...
 
missywinks said:
Hello everyone,

ASL already has cachet as a second language. It is somehow more “cool” to learn ASL then it is to learn, say, French. If someone sees me signing they often ask “Where did you learn to sign. That’s so cool!” But if someone hears me speaking French, there is no excitement or even curiosity. This cachet is also evident in the lucrative business of Baby Sign classes.

It seems to me that the real problem is that no one values ASL as a first language. The article states that a person becomes more fluent in English if they first learn how to read and write in their first language. Should this not be the same for Deaf kids?

Until schools, parents, doctors and audiologists and all of the other so-called experts start to value ASL as a first language, I’m not sure that changing the rhetoric (from bilingual to dual language), is going to make much of a difference.

Just a thought...
Click to expand...

It's because to so-called experts are worried about the development of visual versus aural cortex. They honestly believe if the child is not exposed to the aural component, they cannot learn to receive English.

Sign languages soooooooo obviously strengthen the visual pathways way too strongly.
 
Missy winks, as a parent whose daughter has been at a bi-bi school for the deaf with immersion in both languages for several years (and we hope to continue there throughout her primary & secondary years), I think there are several reasons many parents of deaf and HOH children and educational professionals are skeptical of bilingual programs that combine English and ASL. The top 3 that come to mind: 1. these bi-bi programs are few and far between, and good, academically rigorous programs even fewer; 2. for native users, English is primarily a spoken language acquired within the culture with a written mode learned academically years later, and most ASL/English bilingual programs are not fully immersive in both languages, despite the "bilingual" label: they approach English as a secondary language and in written mode only, regardless of an individual's auditory access, sometimes adding a signed mode (SEE or PSE) to it, leaving a significant gap of sometimes 5 or more (critical) years before even beginning to introduce English to deaf kids; and 3. ASL may be used as the language of instruction and peer interaction, but an academic component to building and using the language is not a formal part of current deaf ed curricula, leaving many deaf students with substandard language/communication abilities -- even in ASL, their primary language.

I think my daughter's school is unique in its approach, and fully addresses these and many other issues, but its excellent approach is not, sadly, the norm.
 
Last edited:
missywinks said:
Hello everyone,

ASL already has cachet as a second language. It is somehow more “cool” to learn ASL then it is to learn, say, French. If someone sees me signing they often ask “Where did you learn to sign. That’s so cool!” But if someone hears me speaking French, there is no excitement or even curiosity. This cachet is also evident in the lucrative business of Baby Sign classes.

It seems to me that the real problem is that no one values ASL as a first language. The article states that a person becomes more fluent in English if they first learn how to read and write in their first language. Should this not be the same for Deaf kids?

Until schools, parents, doctors and audiologists and all of the other so-called experts start to value ASL as a first language, I’m not sure that changing the rhetoric (from bilingual to dual language), is going to make much of a difference.

Just a thought...
Click to expand...

I believe you have hit the nail head on. ASL is generally thought of as a "fall back on" language. It took years for it even to be recognized as a separate language. Unfortunately, there are still many who have not read the linguisitic findings from the 60's and still hold that old belief that a language based on gesture is inferior to a language based on voice.
 
I was just thinking about this - the idea of ASL and other sign languages as a "support" if one "needs it" or a supplemental learning system, which is what seems to be what audi.'s, the overall medical establishment and many schools and other "authorities" believe.
This in opposition to: a way of being, a "connection", a language, a Life, a WHOLE.
 
jillio said:
I believe you have hit the nail head on. ASL is generally thought of as a "fall back on" language. It took years for it even to be recognized as a separate language. Unfortunately, there are still many who have not read the linguisitic findings from the 60's and still hold that old belief that a language based on gesture is inferior to a language based on voice.
Click to expand...

Right on, and also Deafhood means to show Hearing population that Sign Language isnt a cute easy language to learn (Gaga is suspect for her music shit, thnking it will be easy...(WRONG))
anyway

this 'fall back' on shit, also a belief which audist/hearig/naive parents/dumb hearing teachers of the deaf/even deluded 'succeeded deaf teacher of the deaf including KN the knit-noob) into thinking that the prime focus/goal for education is spoken english - it is made even worse when they used word like 'aritculation' you dont hear of signers being described as articulated (correct me if im Wrong!), im just trying to make a point that 'on the other side of the 'fall back' is the 'goal of speech' being placed in hearing society as foremost, kind of a hegemony.

hope im understood?
 
Deafhood have two main aspects of even components if you will.

Firstly, it is for self empowerment as in the venue of self-identity (broader than Deaf culture - Deafhood is more powerful for it serves a secondary, but has a more potent element into it, that is to generate the statement of Deaf people to be recognised as a ethnic group. Disabled people are PLENTY = they have an amount of power mainly because they are HEARING, using spoken/written English, they know how to fight it because they 'usesthe same expressiom' where as the population whose have waning levels of hearing which drastically affects the livihood/ er 'functioning in the hearing world' <not entirely comfortable to say this but (so dont get caught up in functionalism, or medicalisation, or assimilation, this is NOT where im going to)...the point im getting to, is the whole range of those from mild to severe to profound 'hearing losses' do struggle, but we also have found OUR OWN way to live/deal with it, by living our lives in a good unique way, which embodied the characteristically different mode of living, that is we happened to have evolved our own culture, and culture is good enough to be qualified as a basis for ethnic identification. NoW come to the Broad recognition of d/Deaf people belonging to the ethnic group (has to sign to more or less degree and/or have some levels of 'cut off/unable to fit in 100% in hearing world, to 'qualify' (also to have williness to embrace others in a the deaf/slightly outside or really outside the hearing world), thats the fellowship.

Now, having (like i said before) numbers is strenght, that is referring to the numbers of wide range of d/Deaf pelople share the belief 'I am Deaf, and We are Deaf"

That's the crux ; I am Deaf, and We are Deaf, by that, we can then demand my equity on OUR terms not hearings, or hearing's funded insitutions...this would /could also bring force that we *could* have laws to enforce the put-downs/ignorace of d/Deaf people to be forbidden same way touch women's bottom could lead you to be fired from workplaces...that's the similar level which hearing (and some of us deafies?) dont the seriousness of they way they behave towards us. We know its not on, and hence we will say Enough, we have Rights (not just as individuals (because hearing people would look at it as 'isolated cases' ...
i'd stop there now i think i said plenty for now, but i hope this helps the clear the idea of
identity and group identity. self and ethnic, that would also change the way hearing world respect or judge the idea of bi-bi' concepts , put differently I've always suspected the -bi-bi is flawed in the way its presented because it seems to be the 'new fall-back' , that is , according to the hearing...just my suspicious, hope im not the only one who wondered about this...

good day folks
 
On the other hand, I do think that if bi bi programs could set up a program like " spoken English in the morning and then ASL in the afternoon" for preschool/early intervention, we'd see a LOT of parents opting for that.
It does seem like a lot of parents who chose oral, are doing so b/c they're concerned that there's not enough speech in programs that use Sign. That can be true...but on the other hand, if a kid is in a decent speech therapy program, they don't need 24/7 immersian.
 
I think my daughter's school is unique in its approach, and fully addresses these and many other issues, but its excellent approach is not, sadly, the norm.
Click to expand...
OTOH Grendel, there ARE quite a few state Deaf Schools that are hoh friendly/offer good spoken language supports. Oregon School for the Deaf, NYSSD, Kansas School for the Deaf, Florida School for the Deaf and Blind, Maryland School, Rocky Mt. Deaf School, Texas School for the Deaf and many more.
I think right now Deaf Ed is going through a transformation....It really does need a tweak in the early intervention departments, so that they can offer GOOD spoken language along with good quality ASL. I think if good quality spoken language was offered,a LOT of the parents who are chosing oral first,would opt for Deaf Ed for preschool/early childhood education.
But I do think a large part of the reason why Clarke's boarding population has dwindled to 7, is due to the fact that a lot of kids who would have normally been sent to Clarke, b/c of having issues in the mainstream, are instead being sent to state Deaf School, b/c the spoken language services have improved a lot!
 
Back
Top