It's so simple!

[loml]

I have one question Jillio-- My question is why all sudden this thread becomes a question about me? This is about deaf education about deaf children is it or not? Then why are you trying to shift this topic to an opposite direction? It seem to me, You don't like my answers, you gonna learn to deal with someone who thinks different than you.

Cheri -

 

[shel90]

I have one question Jillio-- My question is why all sudden this thread becomes a question about me? This is about deaf education about deaf children is it or not? Then why are you trying to shift this topic to an opposite direction? It seem to me, You don't like my answers, you gonna learn to deal with someone who thinks different than you.

Cheri..see your post #19..you said..

It prevented some deaf children to get the understanding of English word order. They should have use Signed Exact English in all schools,

By saying that, if you think Deaf Ed should use Signed Exact English in all schools then what are you doing about it? That's how I started asking you what was your experience in the field of deaf ed and so forth but I never got a straight answer. Of course, anyone says anything about any programs whether it is education, government, and so forth by saying they should do this or should have that, then of course take action. That's how my questioning about your interest in Deaf ed started.

Like with me before I became a teacher..I saw that many of my brother's peers were graduating with low reading scores from the Deaf school and couldnt understand why that was happening. I did form my opinions and took action by studying to be a teacher cuz I had a vision of getting all deaf children reading on grade level. Little did I know that my opinions to why and how it should be were totally wrong. Until I became a teacher, I really had no clue. Maybe some ideas but only the tip of the iceberg.

You keep saying this or that about the research or the books you read so it is obvious you are interested in Deaf ed and spend a lot of time learning about it which is why I thought since u are so interested, I would ask you why not you be a teacher, advocate or whatever. You seem so passionate about it and I honestly think you would make a great career out of it.

Before I learned ASL or majored in Deaf ed, I thought oral Deaf ed was the answer to all the literacy problems in many deaf children. See how my opinion completely changed after real life experience working in the field.

That's all I have to say.

 

[Cheri]

Cheri..see your post #19..you said..

It prevented some deaf children to get the understanding of English word order. They should have use Signed Exact English in all schools,

By saying that, if you think Deaf Ed should use Signed Exact English in all schools then what are you doing about it?

It's too late now, damage already done, what's done is done. Supposedly you see a deaf child and her first native language was ASL...then she's switched over to total communication and that program uses SEE sign language, the poor girl is struggle to understand the differences between ASL/SEE with English the most will suffer. The bottom line of what I am trying to say is if total communication used SEE in all total communication program; a child wouldn't be confused between ASL/SEE. I don't think SEE is a language, it's more of a method of signs to get a gasp of understanding English, by how they say it, and how they sign it, as the same one would write English.

In a Bi-Bi setting, they use ASL as their first language, and English as their second, that program will work better for those who learned ASL as their primary native language, than those who just came from an oral program. Early language acquisition is the key.

That's how my questioning about your interest in Deaf ed started.

My answer is just simple as it seems, I've met many deaf people from all walks of life (oralists, ASL, SEE, people with good English skills/poor English skills) It got me to a place where I got more interesting in learning what cause differences in educational that each deaf people had experienced. Maybe it'll give me some clues of what I'll be able to find out.

You keep saying this or that about the research or the books you read so it is obvious you are interested in Deaf ed and spend a lot of time learning about it which is why I thought since u are so interested, I would ask you why not you be a teacher, advocate or whatever. You seem so passionate about it and I honestly think you would make a great career out of it.

Well, Thank you. I've done all those research just to get the understanding of what went wrong, and what should have they done better for those deaf children? I don't really think they study the minds of deaf people, their wants, their needs and what would help them successful. I cannot based my opinion on being biased because that wouldn't do anything good for those deaf children.

 

[jillio]

It's too late now, damage already done, what's done is done. Supposedly you see a deaf child and her first native language was ASL...then she's switched over to total communication and that program uses SEE sign language, the poor girl is struggle to understand the differences between ASL/SEE with English the most will suffer. The bottom line of what I am trying to say is if total communication used SEE in all total communication program; a child wouldn't be confused between ASL/SEE. I don't think SEE is a language, it's more of a method of signs to get a gasp of understanding English, by how they say it, and how they sign it, as the same one would write English.

In a Bi-Bi setting, they use ASL as their first language, and English as their second, that program will work better for those who learned ASL as their primary native language, than those who just came from an oral program. Early language acquisition is the key.


My answer is just simple as it seems, I've met many deaf people from all walks of life (oralists, ASL, SEE, people with good English skills/poor English skills) It got me to a place where I got more interesting in learning what cause differences in educational that each deaf people had experienced. Maybe it'll give me some clues of what I'll be able to find out.

Well, Thank you. I've done all those research just to get the understanding of what went wrong, and what should have they done better for those deaf children? I don't really think they study the minds of deaf people, their wants, their needs and what would help them successful. I cannot based my opinion on being biased because that wouldn't do anything good for those deaf children.

Both of the bolded statements are incorrect assumptions. They have been disproven both empirically and anecdotally.

 

[Cheri]

Both of the bolded statements are incorrect assumptions. They have been disproven both empirically and anecdotally.

Yea everything I say is wrong in your eyes. You're just like those hearing professionals who think they know more about deaf children than any deaf adults would know. You think being pushed into learning a whole new different language would work just steady. Think again.

 

[jillio]

Yea everything I say is wrong in your eyes. You're just like those hearing professionals who think they know more about deaf children than any deaf adults would know. You think being pushed into learning a whole new different language would work just steady. Think again.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Its not about thinking. Its about knowing. And the professionals know that a bi-bi atmosphere is the most beneficial to deaf students.

And, the majority of deaf students that are finally permitted to learn ASL do so with great gratitude at having been given the opportunity to gain full access to the academic curriculum for the first time in their lives.

 

[Cheri]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Its not about thinking. Its about knowing. And the professionals know that a bi-bi atmosphere is the most beneficial to deaf students.

And professionals had said the same as for oral, TC and Cued Speech. Look it up; Jillio.

 

[jillio]

And professionals had said the same as for oral, TC and Cued Speech. Look it up; Jillio.

And they were wrong. The results speak for themselves. Deaf ed is in a ridiculous state because of it.

However, the results of Bi-Bi also speak for themselves. So why would you hang onto a philosphy that has already been shown to reduce the performance rates of deaf students?

Go back and look at the OP. "If it isn't broken, don't fix it." Oral, TC, and CS were an attempt to fix something that wasn't broken: the Bi-Bi approach.

 

[Cheri]

First of all bi bi is not well known, to be popular as of yet, oral and total communication was around for a long time yet it was popular back in the 60's 70's. so hold your horse until a couple more years later to get the results of bi-bi program. You're jumping the gun too soon woman.

 

[jillio]

First of all bi bi is not well known, to be popular as of yet, oral and total communication was around for a long time yet it was popular back in the 60's 70's. so hold your horse until a couple more years later to get the results of bi-bi program. You're jumping the gun too soon woman.

We have results from earlier uses of the bi-bi methodology. Student literacy was at its highest compared to hearing students when bi-bi was the practice. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it is effective.:roll:

Once again, if it isn't broken, don't fix it." and "If it doesn't work, don't keep doing it."

 

[Cheri]

We have results from earlier uses of the bi-bi methodology."

All methodologies had a great start off at the begin. It takes years and years to get the strategies results. :roll:

 

[jillio]

All methodologies had a great start off at the begin. It takes years and years to get the strategies results. :roll:

No they didn't. And it doesn't take years and years to see that students are not progressing.

 

[shel90]

Hey Jillo..my friend who is studying for her Master's in Deaf Ed just paged me saying that she read a research about how teachers who are deaf themselves are more effective on judgements of relative text difficulty for deaf students and it was written by Lasasso. Do you know anything about this research. Interesting...and if it proves to be valid, what do u think of it? Any merit to it?

 

[loml]

Survey of Residential and Day Schools for Deaf Students in the

Cheri - You bring some valid thoughts to this discussion. This is an interesting read from Journal of Deaf Studies Deaf Education 2003, 8:79-91, 2003. You can view the entire paper on line.

The purpose of this survey was to determine how many residential and day schools for deaf and hard-of-hearing students in the United States described themselves as bilingualbicultural (BiBi) programs and to describe characteristics of those programs related to initial implementation, whether a
single language (e.g., English or ASL) is promoted as the first language (L1) and the language of instruction for all deaf students, how English is conveyed conversationally to deaf students, the quality of ASL abilities of BiBi instructional and support staff; general characteristics of the curriculum and the specific reading and bicultural components of the curriculum; and characteristics of research being conducted to establish the efficacy of BiBi methods. Ninety-one percent (n = 71) of the 78 day and residential schools listed in the 1998 Directory of the American Annals of the Deaf participated in the survey, with 19 schools identifying themselves as BiBi. These included 16 residential schools and 3 day schools. Depending on the source for numbers of students in residential and day schools at the time of the survey, between 36% and 40% of students were in programs that identified themselves as BiBi.

Sixteen of the programs reported becoming a BiBi program between 1989 and 1994 and only three after 1994. Of the 19 programs, 37% reported use of manually coded English (MCE) for conveying English to the students. Fluency in ASL of instructional and support staff varied, with 47% of the programs
reporting that no more than half of the instructional staff were fluent in ASL and 68% of the programs reporting that no more than half of the support staff were fluent. Only 21% of the 19 programs reported having a formal BiBi curriculum with annual goals and suggested materials and procedures
for teachers. Research implications of these data are discussed.

Survey of Residential and Day Schools for Deaf Students in the United States That Identify Themselves as Bilingual-Bicultural Programs -- LaSasso and Lollis 8 (1): 79 -- The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

 

[jillio]

Hey Jillo..my friend who is studying for her Master's in Deaf Ed just paged me saying that she read a research about how teachers who are deaf themselves are more effective on judgements of relative text difficulty for deaf students and it was written by Lasasso. Do you know anything about this research. Interesting...and if it proves to be valid, what do u think of it? Any merit to it?

I haven't seen it yet, but will look for it ASAP and get back to you. Any chance you know what journal its published in? The hypothesis sounds valid, just need to check methodology and population.

 

[jillio]

Cheri - You bring some valid thoughts to this discussion. This is an interesting read from Journal of Deaf Studies Deaf Education 2003, 8:79-91, 2003. You can view the entire paper on line.



Survey of Residential and Day Schools for Deaf Students in the United States That Identify Themselves as Bilingual-Bicultural Programs -- LaSasso and Lollis 8 (1): 79 -- The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

Published in 2003, data from 1999. How about some recent stats? These are outdated and invalid.

But it did support what I and the other educators on the forum have said, not to mention so many other members.........The MCEs used in a TC program have kept the literacy rates of deaf children at a pitiful low point.

 

[Cheri]

Cheri - You bring some valid thoughts to this discussion.

I'm glad there's at least one/two who appreciated my thoughts on this topic.

This is an interesting read from Journal of Deaf Studies Deaf Education 2003, 8:79-91, 2003. You can view the entire paper on line.

Ioml for this link.

 

[jillio]

I'm glad there's at least one/two who appreciated my thoughts on this topic.


Ioml for this link.

So, you're satified with the fact that using MCEs as instrunctional language in the classroom has kept literacy rates at a constant low?

 

[shel90]

I haven't seen it yet, but will look for it ASAP and get back to you. Any chance you know what journal its published in? The hypothesis sounds valid, just need to check methodology and population.

Let me page my friend. She is doing a thesis for her Master's and has been telling me all the recent research. Geez, I really need to subscribe to Deaf Ed research myself anyway. I used to but I stopped..now I wonder why I stopped. Hmmmm..

 

[loml]

I'm glad there's at least one/two who appreciated my thoughts on this topic.


Ioml for this link.

Cheri - We all have something to share. You are welcome for the link.