It's so simple!

[Cheri]

Cheri..u keep making all these statements about the field of Deaf education as if you are an expert. Have you ever worked as a teacher or have you ever worked in a classroom?

I have never said I was an expert, I've seen deaf signers who had signed in ASL it doesn't even match it's English word order. I have an opinion of what I think of ASL, and I'm allow to use it, you can disagree with me all you want.

Go and do your research how ASL shares no grammatical similarities to English.

And Signed Exact English works just fine by me.

 

[shel90]

I have never said I was an expert, I've seen deaf signers who had signed in ASL it doesn't even match it's English word order. I have an opinion of what I think of ASL, and I'm allow to use it, you can disagree with me all you want.

Go and do your research how ASL shares no grammatical similarities to English. :)

That comment was very uneccessary.

I said "as if you were an expert" and then I asked you a question about your experience working in the classroom. A simple answer would have been sufficient.

U can form an opinion about ASL but how do u really know about teaching when you have never worked in a classroom? The classroom and social settings are very different. But since I never got an answer on whether you have worked in a classroom with deaf kids so I dont know if you have experience in it or not.

Before you tell me to go do research, dont forget that I have done my share and have 10 years of personal experience in the classroom.

I cant form an opinion about electrical engineering and how it should be done cuz I do not possess the training nor the experience in it. All I can say that it sounds hard but how do I really know unless I tried working in this field?

Same concept here.

 

[Cheri]

That comment was very uneccessary.

And yours was necessary? Just because we don't share the same opinion, it doesn't mean I'm wrong and you're right, or I'm right and you're wrong.

U can form an opinion about ASL but how do u really know about teaching when you have never worked in a classroom?

Oh, so I have to walk a mile to experienced it, Well; you formed your opinions all those times in cochlear implant forum, how would you feel if they tell u the same thing?

The classroom and social settings are very different.

You got that right, but you had formed a criticism opinion on all total communication programs when you haven't experience all total communication programs all over the world.

Now, I'm out the door and enjoy my day.

 

[shel90]

And yours was necessary? Just because we don't share the same opinion, it doesn't mean I'm wrong and you're right, or I'm right and you're wrong.


Oh, so I have to walk a mile to experienced it, Well; you formed your opinions all those times in cochlear implant forum, how would you feel if they tell u the same thing?


You got that right, but you had formed a criticism opinion on all total communication programs when you haven't experience all total communication programs all over the world.

Now, I'm out the door and enjoy my day.

What does CI have to do with this topic? We are talking about Deaf Ed, not CIs but since it is brought up..I have worked with numerous of children with CIs and have seen what happens to them when they aren't able to benefit from their CIs leaving them with severe language delays.
My only opinion on children with CIs is that they should be exposed to both ASL and English instead of just spoken language only to minimize the risk of language delays. If that's such an awful thing to wish for all children not to be put at risk for language delays, then I don't know what to say.

Other than that, I have no opinion as I have always stated and still do..implanting children is not my business but the parents'. If it was my children, I wouldn't but doesn't believe I am forming an opinion on others.

Since u have so many opinions on what shud be done in Deaf Ed, why don't u become a teacher yourself and do something about it?

 

[Cheri]

Yes, ASL can be used to teach English. I have 5 years of experience with it and have gotten 2 of my students' reading levels up to on grade level using ASL.

Just two students within five years period? That isn't too many.

Since u have so many opinions on what shud be done in Deaf Ed, why don't u become a teacher yourself and do something about it?

Everyone has different opinions of what they think would be a better education program all deaf children, I cannot choose a better program for them all because no deaf person is the same as another deaf, what might work for one child is not necessarily best for all. I don't want to become a teacher, but I would want all deaf to have an equal education and would not like to see their ability of rights to be limited.

If I was hard on you earlier, I apology.

 

[deafdyke]

The problem is the percentage of kids that oral only works for

I really do think that the oral only sucesses are somewhat biased, b/c so many families who are attracted to oral only, tend to be really high achiever type. Like they are the type where overprogramming is the norm and where the kids are prepped to go to some prestigous college from birth.
What about the typical family that really doesn't go for overachievement? Does oral only work for them? Is there a soci-economic reason for the "acheievement?"
Oh, and Cheri, Chinese is not grammartically simlair to English, but you can use Chinese to teach English. Same with any other spoken language.

 

[jillio]

That's correct, They use the single language to teach English.

I do know what's keeping two languages separate, ASL shares no grammatical similarities to English so you cannot use ASL to teach English, because ASL has it's own grammar and it's own set of rules. Likely some Total Communication program had used ASL as being taught with English, and that's their biggest mistake, it's a failure, and that's one reason why total communication got a lot of criticism for that. It prevented some deaf children to get the understanding of English word order. They should have use Signed Exact English in all schools, which they did not. When bi-bi approach was established in 1980, they kept the two languages separate so there will be no confusions. That's the reason why total communication was changed into into bi/bi philosophy, so it wasn't there in the past, if it was they would have never change if it was a successful program.

Now, I'm off to go swimming with my boys, so good day.

Saying that you cannot use one language to teach another simply because their grammatical stuctures are different is absurd. Our schools use English to teach Spanish, to teach French, to teach Russian, and to teach Japanese, for example. And the Spanish use their language to teach English, and the French use their language to teach English, etc, etc, etc. Colleges use English to teach ASL, so to say that ASL cannot be used to teach English is ridiculous.

 

[jillio]

I have never said I was an expert, I've seen deaf signers who had signed in ASL it doesn't even match it's English word order. I have an opinion of what I think of ASL, and I'm allow to use it, you can disagree with me all you want.

Go and do your research how ASL shares no grammatical similarities to English.

And Signed Exact English works just fine by me.

Of course ASL signers do not use English syntax. If they used English syntax in their signing they would be signing English. But just because they use ASL syntax in their signing does not mean that they do not understand English. It just means that they are bilingual, and not monolingual.

 

[Cheri]

Ok Jillio ASL is a foreign language, just like Spanish, French and so on. I have never said you cannot use English to teach foreign language. You can use English to teach ASL, but I don't see how it is possible to use ASL to teach English, when they don't use English word order in a sentence. It's not ridiculous, to think or wondering how it is possible.

Yet, you have fail to shown proof that during the 1800's they had a bi-lingual/bi-cultural philosophy.

History of Sign VS Aural/Oral

People began researching ASL as a seperate language in the late 1960's, when Stokoe (hearing professor at Gallaudet) suspected that there was more than broken English and gestures happening in Deaf people's communication.

Oralism began to become more popular (world-wide after the infamous Milan Conference in 1880, but has been on a decline since 1970, when Total Communication was introduced into schools. Currently, we are also seeing a rise in bi-lingual/bi-cultural schools for the Deaf, which support the use of ASL as the language of instruction, English as a language for reading and writing, and an appreciation of both Deaf and Hearing cultures

In fact, prior to the early 19th century, deaf children received virtually no formal education. Certainly some were taught to read and write by family members

In 1817, Clerc and Gallaudet established the first school for deaf children in the United States. The school was also the first institution to receive state aid through an 1819 grant; in 1820 the school received a federal grant. It was at this school that the foundation of American Sign Language was born

Over the next hundred years, oralism became the primary method of deaf education. The American School for the Deaf, still at Hartford, used a combined method: if students were not successful in oral classes, they would be transferred to the manual program

In the 1960's, manualism achieved new recognition when research showed ASL to be a fully distinct language from English. Some deaf schools, such as St. Rita's in Cincinnati, Ohio, used a dual approach called Total Communication. This meant using whatever means was necessary to communicate with a child - speech, sign, or gestures.

In the space of 200 years, deaf education has progressed from manualism to oralism to a bilingual-bicultural model. The future of deaf education is uncertain, but it will undoubtedly change to benefit America's deaf children as much as possible.

Deaf Education in the United States@Everything2.com

 

[jillio]

Ok Jillio ASL is a foreign language, just like Spanish, French and so on. I have never said you cannot use English to teach foreign language. You can use English to teach ASL, but I don't see how it is possible to use ASL to teach English, when they don't use English word order in a sentence. It's not ridiculous, to think or wondering how it is possible.

Yet, you have fail to shown proof that during the 1800's they had a bi-lingual/bi-cultural philosophy.

History of Sign VS Aural/Oral[







[url=http://everything2.com/e2node/Deaf%2520Education%2520in%2520the%2520United%2520States]Deaf Education in the United States@Everything2.com

ASL shares no grammatical similarities to English so you cannot use ASL to teach English, because ASL has it's own grammar and it's own set of rules.

The above statement is directly from your post. That is not a question regardinghow it can be done, but a statement saying that it can't be done. That is an incorrect statement, as it is being done on a daily basis, and was done historically.

Sweetie, I don't have to show proof. All one has to do is read and understand what they read about the history of deaf education. Several of the quotes you have used actually support the fact that education prior to 1817 was indeed a bicultural/bilingual education.

I prefer to get my information from a reputable text on deaf history and deaf education. It is much more reliable than the website you provided.

And, if English can be used to teach ASL, then ASL can be used to teach English. The syntaxes are still different, no matter which is used to teach which. That's the same as saying you can use English to teach Spanish, but you can't use Spanish to teach English. It's just a wrong statement, no matter how you say it.

 

[Cheri]

Sweetie, I don't have to show proof. All one has to do is read and understand what they read about the history of deaf education. Several of the quotes you have used actually support the fact that education prior to 1817 was indeed a bicultural/bilingual education.

That's all they provide on google, What do you expect me to do? Print out a library book and show it to you? At least I provide some source, where's yours?

I prefer to get my information from a reputable text on deaf history and deaf education. It is much more reliable than the website you provided.

And yet you still haven't provide your information where you heard it off from. You have heard it somewhere, but you're not exactly telling us where.

 

[jillio]

That's all they provide on google, What do you expect me to do? Print out a library book and show it to you?


And yet you still haven't provide your information where you heard it off from. You have heard it somewhere, but you're not exactly telling us where.

No, I expect you to read a library book. I have already done so.

I din't "hear" it anywhere. I learned it from years of study.

 

[Cheri]

I din't "hear" it anywhere. I learned it from years of study.

it'll be nice to know where you learned it from, since I'm sure there's deaf people would like to know it's history too, beside I haven't seen at least one that had mention bi-bi in the 1800's, this is my side of the truth.

 

[jillio]

it'll be nice to know where you learned it from, since I'm sure there's deaf people would like to know it's history too, beside I haven't seen at least one that had mention bi-bi in the 1800's, this is my side of the truth.

As it has been stated many times before, it was not called bi-bi in the 1800's but the philosophy was the same as the program we call bi-bi now. The philosophy has not changed, just the terminology.

And I learned it from reading many, many books on deaf culture, from doing research, from taking classes, etc, etc, etc. and from interaction with the Deaf community.

 

[Cheri]

As it has been stated many times before, it was not called bi-bi in the 1800's but the philosophy was the same as the program we call bi-bi now. The philosophy has not changed, just the terminology.

From what I've read from you on your original post that "Deaf education as a bi-bi philosophy in the 1800's was effective." as a... sound like you're saying it was a bi-bi philosophy in 1800.

 

[jillio]

From what I've read from you on your original post that "Deaf education as a bi-bi philosophy in the 1800's was effective." as a... sound like you're saying it was a bi-bi philosophy in 1800.

Let's try this again...... The philosophy was the same. The terminology was different. Do you understand now?

 

[Wokamuka]

I thought the anti-bi-bi philosophy began in the 1880s?

 

[jillio]

I thought the anti-bi-bi philosophy began in the 1880s?

Yes, thanks to the Milan Congress.

 

[Cheri]

Yes, thanks to the Milan Congress.

Yep, It was a bias vote 74% of the Congress were oralist supporters

 

[jillio]

It was a bias vote anyways, 74% of the Congress were oralist supporters

Exactly. Which is exactly why the Milan Congress is responsible for moving away from the bi-bi approach that was so effective into oral education which hasn't.