It's so simple!

jillio said:
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.
Click to expand...

But, the problem is there was only a few people who favored the use of sign language; I believe Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet was one of those few people. It wasn't enough to get supports to keep sign language going.
 
Cheri said:
But, the problem is there was only a few people who favored the use of sign language; I believe Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet was one of those few people. It wasn't enough to get supports to keep sign language going.
Click to expand...


Keep in mind that the majority of the deaf prefer sign but they weren't allowed to speak for themselves at that conference and the Oralists won the day.
 
Cheri said:
Just two students within five years period? That isn't too many.
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.
Click to expand...

My first year, I worked in preK with children who had severe special needs like autism, behavioral disorders and mental retardation.

2nd year, worked with 3rd graders with severe special needs like autism, emotional disorders, and autism.

3rd year, same student but in 4th grade.

4th year, worked with 1st graders with severe language delays. These kids came to our school with no language so of course it takes years for language to develop to the point where they are ready to read and write.

5th year, worked with 3rd graders who were a few years behind with reading and in that year, I got 2 students' reading levels all caught up from early 2nd grade to 4th grade reading level in 1 year. The other students are almost caught up and I will have that class again next year. If all goes according to the plan, then all of them should be caught up. It depends on 2 students' attendence since the recent year they were both absent frequently due to some issues.

U have to remember that most of our students get referred to our programs after falling so far behind in other programs especially the oral programs. Also, many of them are weak in both ASL and English because they didnt build a strong language foundation during their first 5 years so that impacts their ability to develop literacy skills for a long time.

Teaching is a very very very tough job especially working with students who have severe language delays. I put in an average of 10 hours a day when I dont need to but because I care and I want to give my students the best education that they deserve after being deprived for so long.

It breaks my heart year after year to see so many kids so far behind simply because people do not want to expose them to ASL at first.

I accept your apology and I am glad to see that you are trying to understand all the issues behind Deaf Ed.

Have a great weekend. I will be at Ocean City with my girls all weekend. TTYL
 
My friend who is a deaf school teacher who told me the same things you (shel90) talking about several CI students who transferred from somewhere to teh deaf school. He noticed that they were behind with the English language unlike those bi-bi deaf students. Think that they were in the 6th grade or thereabouts. (those who didn't learn ASL before or very little before) He said he is against CIs - only on those young kids whoever was forced to learn oralism only.

I do have several other teacher friends so I will bring them up someday and see what they say to share it here. (pretty sure they might say the same likely)
---------------
Only a question to ponder unless anyone knows:

Do those CIs and any students who attend oralism schools develop English well rather in their late teens despite picking up with their language skills? We know much about the pre-linguistic and post-linguistic stuff which is more obvious part what we debate on so far. But I wonder about this one, the question just above.
 
Cheri said:
But, the problem is there was only a few people who favored the use of sign language; I believe Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet was one of those few people. It wasn't enough to get supports to keep sign language going.
Click to expand...

It wasn't that it was just a few. It was that the hearing oralists forced their views, and refused to listen to the deaf and those who were experts in educating the deaf......much the same as what we are seeing today.
 
shel90 said:
My first year, I worked in preK with children who had severe special needs like autism, behavioral disorders and mental retardation.

2nd year, worked with 3rd graders with severe special needs like autism, emotional disorders, and autism.

3rd year, same student but in 4th grade.

4th year, worked with 1st graders with severe language delays. These kids came to our school with no language so of course it takes years for language to develop to the point where they are ready to read and write.

5th year, worked with 3rd graders who were a few years behind with reading and in that year, I got 2 students' reading levels all caught up from early 2nd grade to 4th grade reading level in 1 year. The other students are almost caught up and I will have that class again next year. If all goes according to the plan, then all of them should be caught up. It depends on 2 students' attendence since the recent year they were both absent frequently due to some issues.

U have to remember that most of our students get referred to our programs after falling so far behind in other programs especially the oral programs. Also, many of them are weak in both ASL and English because they didnt build a strong language foundation during their first 5 years so that impacts their ability to develop literacy skills for a long time.

Teaching is a very very very tough job especially working with students who have severe language delays. I put in an average of 10 hours a day when I dont need to but because I care and I want to give my students the best education that they deserve after being deprived for so long.

It breaks my heart year after year to see so many kids so far behind simply because people do not want to expose them to ASL at first.

I accept your apology and I am glad to see that you are trying to understand all the issues behind Deaf Ed.

Have a great weekend. I will be at Ocean City with my girls all weekend. TTYL
Click to expand...

Wish we had more educators with your dedication, shel. Enjoy your weekend!
 
web730 said:
My friend who is a deaf school teacher who told me the same things you (shel90) talking about several CI students who transferred from somewhere to teh deaf school. He noticed that they were behind with the English language unlike those bi-bi deaf students. Think that they were in the 6th grade or thereabouts. (those who didn't learn ASL before or very little before) He said he is against CIs - only on those young kids whoever was forced to learn oralism only.

I do have several other teacher friends so I will bring them up someday and see what they say to share it here. (pretty sure they might say the same likely)
---------------
Only a question to ponder unless anyone knows:

Do those CIs and any students who attend oralism schools develop English well rather in their late teens despite picking up with their language skills? We know much about the pre-linguistic and post-linguistic stuff which is more obvious part what we debate on so far. But I wonder about this one, the question just above.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the other teachers told you the same thing. We are seeing it widespread. Children are being implanted earlier, and restricted to oral only environments. It is the oral only environment that is creating the language delays seen in these students, just the same as we saw language delays in kids with HA that were restricted to oral only environments.
 
Cheri said:
But, the problem is there was only a few people who favored the use of sign language; I believe Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet was one of those few people. It wasn't enough to get supports to keep sign language going.
Click to expand...

Of course, it was the oralists (hearing educators of oralism) who mucked up everything. In the meantime, prior to oralism (hearing educators & what they did), what was happening in the deaf world whose members were deaf and HoH? Pretty much all of them used ASL. Then after oralism (again hearing oralism educators) took place here and was deep-rooted in the education field, what happened? A divide between ASLers and deaf oralists took place and it came to pass that oralist deafies were "better than" ASL deafies.

There has been an effort in the past few short decades to swing the other way because we know oralism has MOSTLY failed (from an educational standpoint) on a number of levels. The ideal now is that Deaf, deaf, CI, HoH, etc, and yes, even the few cuers.... come together as one large social and political group and focus on the bibi approach which basically has proven to be the better educational approach which is literacy via ASL. I keep hearing more and more everyday about deaf people who are literate, use a CI and ASL like a native and all kinds of functioning deafies in between.

At the end of the day, we all can go back to our lives and carry on in our own unique and diverse ways. Hey, I'm beginning to babble.........
 
Cheri said:
Just two students within five years period? That isn't too many.
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.
Click to expand...


Cheri,

You hit the nail on the head. All this arguing and going back and forth is so pointless: there is no one "better" program for all children, even deaf children. The task, and it is not an easy one, if for parents to find and to choose the best program for their child.

We could spend all day giving examples of a child who succeeded in one program and another child who did not in the same program but what is the point? As you said, each child is different. I can see that with my own two daughters, my deaf daughter is, and always has been, a student who learns best auditorily while my hearing daughter learns best visually.

You said it best when you said earlier that just because you have an opinion does not mean that you are right and I am wrong. I think there are many situations when reasonable people, placed in the same situation, can choose a different path, both of which can be the best or worst for their child depending upon their unique situation.
Rick
 
Tousi said:
Of course, it was the oralists (hearing educators of oralism) who mucked up everything. In the meantime, prior to oralism (hearing educators & what they did), what was happening in the deaf world whose members were deaf and HoH? Pretty much all of them used ASL. Then after oralism (again hearing oralism educators) took place here and was deep-rooted in the education field, what happened? A divide between ASLers and deaf oralists took place and it came to pass that oralist deafies were "better than" ASL deafies.

There has been an effort in the past few short decades to swing the other way because we know oralism has MOSTLY failed (from an educational standpoint) on a number of levels. The ideal now is that Deaf, deaf, CI, HoH, etc, and yes, even the few cuers.... come together as one large social and political group and focus on the bibi approach which basically has proven to be the better educational approach which is literacy via ASL. I keep hearing more and more everyday about deaf people who are literate, use a CI and ASL like a native and all kinds of functioning deafies in between.

At the end of the day, we all can go back to our lives and carry on in our own unique and diverse ways. Hey, I'm beginning to babble.........
Click to expand...

Tousi - I agree with some of your post. :) With regard to the Bi-Bi approach that you are referring to, where ASL is L1 and English (L2) taught via ASL, I do not agree. My gravest concern here, is that the needs of each individual family are being trivialized. imo I believe a child should be provided the necessary tools to experience their families culture and language, in their own home.

Historically and to this date few families are fluent and native language models of ASL for their deaf child. How is this issue going to be solved realistically? How is the Deaf community reaching out to these families?
Why would the Deaf community insist/pressure hearing families to learn a foreing language, as adults (which is much more diffiuclt to do), along with all the other dynmaics/stresses that are going on when cueing is avaiable? How is pressuring parents to become role models of a foreign language, that many do not suceed, in the childs' best interest? Language begins at home, not when you enter school.

IMO, the child should be provided, upon diagnosis English via cueing from his/her own hearing family and ASL from a fluent Deaf adult. Cueing does NOT equate to the old days of oralism. To view it as such is simply wrong.
 
My post was intended to give a very broad overview, to Cheri, of the deaf population from a historical view and how it is now pretty much a general concensus that the BiBi approach is appealing without getting down to the nitty gritty with most hearing folks who aren't open to what you (LOML) are talking about because I'm not a professional AND those hearing folks, professional or otherwise, who have disagreed with the native view for so long that I don't have the time for them.
 
rick48 said:
Cheri,

You hit the nail on the head. All this arguing and going back and forth is so pointless: there is no one "better" program for all children, even deaf children. The task, and it is not an easy one, if for parents to find and to choose the best program for their child.

We could spend all day giving examples of a child who succeeded in one program and another child who did not in the same program but what is the point? As you said, each child is different. I can see that with my own two daughters, my deaf daughter is, and always has been, a student who learns best auditorily while my hearing daughter learns best visually.

You said it best when you said earlier that just because you have an opinion does not mean that you are right and I am wrong. I think there are many situations when reasonable people, placed in the same situation, can choose a different path, both of which can be the best or worst for their child depending upon their unique situation.
Rick
Click to expand...


rick48 - :gpost:
 
Tousi said:
My post was intended to give a very broad overview, to Cheri, of the deaf population from a historical view and how it is now pretty much a general concensus that the BiBi approach is appealing without getting down to the nitty gritty with most hearing folks who aren't open to what you (LOML) are talking about because I'm not a professional AND those hearing folks, professional or otherwise, who have disagreed with the native view for so long that I don't have the time for them.
Click to expand...

Tosui - Fair enough. :) I will add that, ime, hearing parents of deaf children are very open to cueing, when provided the opportunity. The hearing professionals are certainly of a different mindset and ,ime/imo, will/have resorted to fear tactics with these same parents. The same can be said of the local Deaf community, for mostly political reasons, again, imo/ime. This saddens me greatly.

I would sorely like to witness a program where all deaf children reach their potential, without what I believe are unnecessary struggles for the learning of English or ASL.
 
Tousi said:
Of course, it was the oralists (hearing educators of oralism) who mucked up everything. In the meantime, prior to oralism (hearing educators & what they did), what was happening in the deaf world whose members were deaf and HoH? Pretty much all of them used ASL. Then after oralism (again hearing oralism educators) took place here and was deep-rooted in the education field, what happened? A divide between ASLers and deaf oralists took place and it came to pass that oralist deafies were "better than" ASL deafies.

There has been an effort in the past few short decades to swing the other way because we know oralism has MOSTLY failed (from an educational standpoint) on a number of levels. The ideal now is that Deaf, deaf, CI, HoH, etc, and yes, even the few cuers.... come together as one large social and political group and focus on the bibi approach which basically has proven to be the better educational approach which is literacy via ASL. I keep hearing more and more everyday about deaf people who are literate, use a CI and ASL like a native and all kinds of functioning deafies in between.

At the end of the day, we all can go back to our lives and carry on in our own unique and diverse ways. Hey, I'm beginning to babble.........
Click to expand...

Not babbling at all. Very insightful.
 
rick48 said:
Cheri,

You hit the nail on the head. All this arguing and going back and forth is so pointless: there is no one "better" program for all children, even deaf children. The task, and it is not an easy one, if for parents to find and to choose the best program for their child.

We could spend all day giving examples of a child who succeeded in one program and another child who did not in the same program but what is the point? As you said, each child is different. I can see that with my own two daughters, my deaf daughter is, and always has been, a student who learns best auditorily while my hearing daughter learns best visually.

You said it best when you said earlier that just because you have an opinion does not mean that you are right and I am wrong. I think there are many situations when reasonable people, placed in the same situation, can choose a different path, both of which can be the best or worst for their child depending upon their unique situation.
Rick
Click to expand...

We are not discussing individuals. We are discussing educational policy as a whole for deaf/hoh children. And the policies that are revalent today are underserving and unereducting the vast majority of deaf/hoh kids.
 
loml said:
Tosui - Fair enough. :) I will add that, ime, hearing parents of deaf children are very open to cueing, when provided the opportunity. The hearing professionals are certainly of a different mindset and ,ime/imo, will/have resorted to fear tactics with these same parents. The same can be said of the local Deaf community, for mostly political reasons, again, imo/ime. This saddens me greatly.

I would sorely like to witness a program where all deaf children reach their potential, without what I believe are unnecessary struggles for the learning of English or ASL.
Click to expand...

This is not a thread on CS. Deaf children, on the whole, do not stuggle with ASL, and if provided ASL in a bi-bi atmosphere, do not struggle with English an more than the average hearing student stuggles with English. CS was not even invented at the time that literacy rates were highest for deaf children. Bi-bi education was the norm, and it allowed students to perform at rates on par with hearing peers. See principle #1 in the OP. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Invented systems aren't necessary. They are nothing more than an attempt to fix what has never been broken.

Likewise, if something doesn't work, don't keep doing it. CS, after 40 years, still does not have empirical support, and very little academic support from the experts in deaf ed.
 
jillio said:
We are not discussing individuals. We are discussing educational policy as a whole for deaf/hoh children. And the policies that are revalent today are underserving and unereducting the vast majority of deaf/hoh kids.
Click to expand...

Yes, jillio... he spoke rather certain individuals based only... although he may be correct only for those certain individuals and schools. Yet we need to debate based on the broad approach - even for both school systems.

Also it's best left to the educators simply because they gathered much more from noticing how young students learned for years. Therefore those educators are far more qualified to debate on which is the better way to educate with a broader approach, if not for few certain individuals.

Although we all are free and pleased to share and debate our opinions and experiences of course, it's great to do something else to improve for the future young kids whom we cannot afford to waste any more old mistakes from we have seen so far.
 
jillio said:
We are not discussing individuals. We are discussing educational policy as a whole for deaf/hoh children. And the policies that are revalent today are underserving and unereducting the vast majority of deaf/hoh kids.
Click to expand...


Frankly, I neither care what you think you are discussing nor do I intend to ever limit my responses based on what you think a discussion should be limited to. There is no one system, school, program etc. that educates the "whole" population of deaf children but each and every deaf child must be educated by some particular system, school, program, etc.

So, feel free to discuss programs that may or may not meet the needs of an individual deaf child, and save your comments for someone who not only cares but thinks they have any merit.
 
web730 said:
Yes, jillio... he spoke rather certain individuals based only... although he may be correct only for those certain individuals and schools. Yet we need to debate based on the broad approach - even for both school systems.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that is a rather simplistic interpretation and you have missed the main concept that, at all times, the education of any child, even a deaf child, must be tailored towards that child's unique needs and that there is no one, or "better" approach for educating any child, again, even a deaf child.
Rick
 
Back
Top