Should Deaf babies learn just only ASL?

and therapy that could work. It doesn't have to be boring grueling work. Just one hour daily is no big deal.
Exactly....if therapy works minimal amounts of therapy will be just as benifical as therapy 24/7! I do not beleive that dhh kids need to be in an eternal speech therapy session. Yes, speech is a GREAT skill to have, but for crying out loud......

We all know ASL DOES NOT take after English so, just how does one teach both English and ASL SIMULTANEOUSLY? Or did you mean something else?
Well grammartically and lingisticly French, Farsi, Swedish, Greek, Spanish, Russian, Chinese, and other languages do NOT take after English but there's nobody out there saying that kids cannot learn those languages simultauosly!
Now as for leading children to literacy(which is English) by using ASL, we got ourselves a whole 'nother story here cos it hasn't been proven YET that that method works.
Yes it has......DODAs have better reading levels then do hearing of Deaf!
What about the work that TLC has done?
 
VamPyroX said:
ASL is considered a second language, but I don't think it should. I think it should be considered as "broken" or "short-hand" language since it is a shorter version of the full language. Other foreign languages also follow their own proper grammar structures. Since they are following specific rules when speaking it, they learn how grammar works and learning a second language doesn't become a problem for them. However, when learning ASL... you aren't exactly learning proper grammar structure because too many words are left out and there is no real rule for the structure either. As a result, the grammar isn't proper and it becomes too confusing when put on paper. In our language, we would say, "I am going to my friend's house for a party." In another language, it would probably be "I am going for a party at the house of my friend." When learning from one language to another, it's a matter of knowing what structure because there are rules. In ASL, it would probably be "Me Go Friend House Party." There are no specific rule so we're screwed.

For a long time, people tried to force English into grammatical notions derived from Latin. Once they stopped doing that, they could figure out how English really works. ASL has grammatical structures--they're just not the same as those of English.

Japanese leaves out words a lot--overusing the words that correspond to English pronouns is a mark of a gaijin (foreigner). The idea is, once everyone understands who's being referred to, why waste time repeating yourself? Despite that, Japanese does have a grammar.

Chinese doesn't inflect pronouns--position indicates the difference between "i" and "me." Despite that, Chinese does have a grammar.
 
I rather do both, verbal and ASL. I've always done that with all of my 3 kids.. even though my last two is hearing and my first son is hoh and communicates well in both ways.
 
Hi - I'm pretty new here but would like to make a couple of comments. I am SSD and never felt fully like a part of the hearing community. However I do hear. I also know some of the frustrations of deafness (although minor in comparison). I am amazed by these postings as I never knew there was such a big difference in ASL and english. I suppose I thought they were closely related with it being AMERICAN Sign Language and all. That said, as a partially hearing person I must say that English is extremely important as is ASL. I feel that ASL should be a required course in high school instead of Spanish (as it is here in Florida). However, most hearing people (at least the ones I know) come in contact with very few deaf people. That being the case, english is very important in communicating with the non-deaf community and for life in general (shopping, reading, etc.). I agree that children can learn 2 languages so much easier than adults and that ASL and english should be tought simultaneously as is done in other multicultural homes, i.e. english/spanish. However, I am unsure as to how it would be done since it seems like a huge undertaking! I understand some people not wanting to lose the deaf culture but I truly believe that you can have both abilities (ASL and english) and not lose sight of who you are.
 
Deaf258 said:
I would support using ASL and English at the same time.



I Agree with Deaf258, because Deaf babies will not learn how to speak if they are taught sign language only. English would help babies learn to speak. So, Babies can learn both recognition of letters and sounds, better spelling, communcate better. :)
 
AP, Excellent post! I have friends who have other disabilties (such as learning and emoitional as well as physical) or other differences like skin color, religion, sexual oreintation or whathave-you, and MANY of them felt like they didn't fit into the white middle class suburban Christian ideal of "American mainstream"
I think a lot of mildly disabled kids automaticly get sucked into the mainstream b/c parents think that they don't need exposure to adults or peers with disabilties b/c they are more "normal" then disabled. Part of my activism is to encourage parents of mildly disabled kids to expose them to the mainstream AND the alternative cultures/options/activities which their disabilties may offer. Yes, I liked playing softball with the neighborhood gang and I am VERY glad that I was challenged academicly by having access to the same curriculum as my hearing grade-level peers. But I wish I'd had access to adaptive sports (like Easter Seals) and other kids like me. I never want another kid to think that they are the only ones in the world with their particular disabiltiy.
my first son is hoh and communicates well in both ways.
Really? Fluent in BOTH ASL and English? Was he exposed to them at the same time? I think it would be interesting to study hard of hearing offspring of Deaf adults....speaking of which, back to MY research!
 
I'd rather raise my kids both ASL and speech. So they can communicate with everybody.
 
Emerica said:
Should Deaf babies learn just only ASL? Why or why not? When do you incorporate English?

Well, If anyone even cares about the studies that have been done on this issue and doesn't try and make a fight between ASL and English, the wisdom is that the important thing is that the child "Master" a language, *any* language, or he will be in danger of not being able to master *any* language. Since a deaf child cannot master English by the age of six, ASL ought to be the exclusive method.

If you've ever known deaf people who were deprived of language in childhood and seen what kind of adults the turned out to be, it makes you think very hard about the consequences of trying to get your child to "master" a language he can't hear. Studies in second-language acquisition for the past 250 years show that those who master a first language are the very ones who acquire a second language the easiest.

The most cited evidence of this among deaf people are the "deaf-of-deaf" studies. Deaf children who have deaf parents. These children have the easiest time academically and in acquiring English as a second language.

But you may be talking about getting the child to speak. If that's the point you are making, you are talking about a skill in which professionals in the field can tell you what they, why they do it, but they cannot predict what effect their efforts will have on any individual child.

If your child somehow has an easy time of learning to speak, professionals will take credit for it. Deaf children who have an easy time acquiring spoken English, however, are the *exception* and not the *rule*. Some children do well no matter what environment they are in. The "Rule", and by this I mean the "average" deaf child," has a very hard time acquiring spoken English. Some deaf kids don't. But like I said, they are the exception. But if your child doesn't learn easily to speak, they will measure his I.Q., run 80 million tests on him, take assessment of his home environment, and from the results of one of those tests, they will end up blaming someone else, like the parents, the home environment, the school environment, the program at school, the listening devise being used, or the child himself, etc., etc.

Know what I mean? It will be an endless list of things this child "must" have to keep him in the fold of the human services profession. You, I'm sure, know what the effect is of doing that: it means for the rest of his life someone will be pointing out how he isn't "hearing" or how he isn't "normal" or how he isn't "receptive" to whatever they are doing to him.

Speaking is an asset, but it's not *everything*. Good mental health is preferable. Growing up with a good sense of one's self will make a bigger difference in a kid's life than all the speech lessons in the world. Use the tools God gave the deaf: your hands, and make sure he grows up understanding everything.
 
Last edited:
I think that both languages..ASL and English should be taught simultaniously,..

if possible, but I also think that just getting a language of any type and the concept of language into a child before the age of three is vastly more important than worrying about which language is the first language that that child learns!!
 
Hello, I'm new to this forum. My husband has been lurking these forums for quite a while and have urged me to read some of the threads and post replies. Well, today, I have finally decided to register and put in my two cents.

I would like to give some background of how I was raised. I am Deaf, my parents are Deaf and so are my two older brothers. My mother has one hearing brother, one Deaf brother and two Deaf sisters. My father was born hearing until he became ill from being prescribed the wrong medicine when he was three months old.

Anyway, from birth, I was exposed to ASL and was already quite fluent by the age of three, or so I was told by my grandmother and parents. I do remember several occurences when I was 2 or 3 years old; my parents were discussing what to buy us for Christmas and I could understand everything they were signing. So, when Christmas morning came, I knew what I was getting. I would sign what the presents were before I opened them. My parents were quite flabbergasted, as you could imagine.

I started pre-school at the age of 3 at a hearing pre-school. I didn't have an interpreter and I was the only Deaf student at this school. Later on, my pre-school teacher picked up a few signs from me. Oddly enough, I also learned how to speak by imitating the teacher (keep in mind, I'm profoundly Deaf). I was able to talk to my fellow classmates, but I didn't always understand them.

Finally, I entered elementary school where they had a couple of Deaf Resource teachers. The teachers were fluent in sign, not necessarily ASL, but more like a mixture of SEE and PSE (sign systems). I should also point out that prior to the enrollment of pre and elementary schools, my parents would read books to me in ASL. They would point out some words in the book and show me the sign. I naturally made the connection, similar to hearing children of hearing parents. Those children are told what an item is called by enunciating the object's name.

Obviously, I learned English quite easily. On state tests which were administered annually, I would always score above average in the reading/language portions than my hearing peers. I also scored quite well in other areas such as: mathematics, social studies and science. I was enrolled in the Expanded Learning Program (ELP) for gifted students.

Recently, actually last year, I graduated from McDaniel College (aka Western Maryland College) in the Deaf Education Masters program. The specific educational method this college encouraged was the Bilingual Bicultural Philosophy. I thought this philosophy was the only educational method for Deaf students that made sense compared to Total Communication and Oral/Aural approach. As Rayfus posted below, this is exactly what I learned from my studies at McDaniel College.


Well, If anyone even cares about the studies that have been done on this issue and doesn't try and make a fight between ASL and English, the wisdom is that the important thing is that the child "Master" a language, *any* language, or he will be in danger of not being able to master *any* language. Since a deaf child cannot master English by the age of six, ASL ought to be the exclusive method.

Deaf children should learn a natural language first, which is ASL. ASL ensures that the Deaf children will have a first language basis. After the age of 2 or 3, or even school age (5 to 6 years old), Deaf children should then be taught English formally, in regards to reading and writing. I would not advise speech therapy until the child has understood the basics of the English grammar and some English words.

Keep in mind, not all Deaf children are able to speak well, clearly, or at all. In my case, I just picked up on speech. My two older brothers are not able to speak clearly as I can. Even though we came from the same family, used the same language methods, etc., they still cannot speak clearly.

I think this is long enough for now. I'm anxious to see what other have to say in regards to this topic.
 
Oddly enough, I also learned how to speak by imitating the teacher (keep in mind, I'm profoundly Deaf). I was able to talk to my fellow classmates, but I didn't always understand them.
WOW....did you wear aids or were you able just to learn to speak? Obviously you didn't have apraxia or anything like that


Obviously, I learned English quite easily. On state tests which were administered annually, I would always score above average in the reading/language portions than my hearing peers. I also scored quite well in other areas such as: mathematics, social studies and science. I was enrolled in the Expanded Learning Program (ELP) for gifted students.
Good point.....I wonder if Deaf kids would acheive more if they were enrolled in educational programs that concentrated on their strenghs rather then their weaknesses.





Deaf children should learn a natural language first, which is ASL. ASL ensures that the Deaf children will have a first language basis. After the age of 2 or 3, or even school age (5 to 6 years old), Deaf children should then be taught English formally, in regards to reading and writing. I would not advise speech therapy until the child has understood the basics of the English grammar and some English words.

Keep in mind, not all Deaf children are able to speak well, clearly, or at all. In my case, I just picked up on speech. My two older brothers are not able to speak clearly as I can. Even though we came from the same family, used the same language methods, etc., they still cannot speak clearly.

I think this is long enough for now. I'm anxious to see what other have to say in regards to this topic.
On the other hand there IS a small window of oppertunity for the abilty to learn to speak clearly. I think if a kid can have that oppertunity to develop those skills, then they should since oral skills are wicked wicked useful.
 
WOW....did you wear aids or were you able just to learn to speak? Obviously you didn't have apraxia or anything like that

I did have hearing aids, yes. The only thing they helped me hear was the surrounding environmental sounds, i.e., truck/car driving by, birds, kids yelling, etc. I was not able to hear someone speak and understand what they said, and I still can't. I have to lipread in order to understand what the hearing person is saying.
Do you realize that the definition of apraxia is the inability to make purposeful movements? Obviously, I was able to move just fine.

Good point.....I wonder if Deaf kids would acheive more if they were enrolled in educational programs that concentrated on their strenghs rather then their weaknesses.
I would have to say that I don't think it's wise to ignore or neglect a child's weaknesses, but rather work on it to help that area to become a strength, like his/her other areas.

On the other hand there IS a small window of oppertunity for the abilty to learn to speak clearly. I think if a kid can have that oppertunity to develop those skills, then they should since oral skills are wicked wicked useful.
I have to disagree here. I don't believe there is a "small window of opportunity" for every Deaf child to speak clearly. I can't say this for a fact, but from my observations of many Deaf children. I have seen Deaf children from Deaf parents who can speak clearly, and some who cannot speak at all. As well as Deaf children from Hearing parents, there are some who can and some who can't. I don't know why; maybe it has something to do with residual hearing. I know that I did have slightly more hearing than my older brothers did and I always wore my hearing aids. I was always conscious of the sounds around me. My brothers did not care for the hearing aids, maybe that's why. I believe there's a need for more research in this area. Yes, oral skills are helpful, but not always necessary. Sometimes at stores and restaurants, I don't speak, but instead write things down and I refuse to lipread. This way, the hearing waitresses/waiters/salesperson are exposed to Deaf people which forces them to communicate in other ways beside talking, because not every Deaf person can lipread and speak.
 
Jess, actually apraxia is an oral motor planning disabilty that is very common among dhh kids. Kids with apraxia usually require special teachers and techniques/therapists to learn to speak. There are kids who cannot hear speech but can still learn to use residual hearing to learn to speak.
I would have to say that I don't think it's wise to ignore or neglect a child's weaknesses, but rather work on it to help that area to become a strength, like his/her other areas.
Oh I agree........I'm just pointing out that oral education tends to promote therapy as a lifestyle, and doesn't really focus on a dhh kid's strenghs.
I have to disagree here. I don't believe there is a "small window of opportunity" for every Deaf child to speak clearly. I can't say this for a fact, but from my observations of many Deaf children
Well what do you mean by "clearly?" Early intervention is important so that they do have some verbal skills to reach for in times of need. I mean you can't always use a pen and pencil (like in a bank) Most deaf kids CAN learn to speak...but not all can speak clearly. I just think it's best to start out with EVERYTHING and ANYTHING available.
 
Jess, actually apraxia is an oral motor planning disabilty that is very common among dhh kids. Kids with apraxia usually require special teachers and techniques/therapists to learn to speak. There are kids who cannot hear speech but can still learn to use residual hearing to learn to speak.
Thank you for clarifying the definition of apraxia. I have heard of that term before but wasn't exactly sure what it had to do with your post. Thanks again.
Oh I agree........I'm just pointing out that oral education tends to promote therapy as a lifestyle, and doesn't really focus on a dhh kid's strenghs.
You're right; it's a part of a lifestyle.
Well what do you mean by "clearly?" Early intervention is important so that they do have some verbal skills to reach for in times of need. I mean you can't always use a pen and pencil (like in a bank) Most deaf kids CAN learn to speak...but not all can speak clearly. I just think it's best to start out with EVERYTHING and ANYTHING available.
I think you answered your question: what do you mean by "clearly"? in your post. Also, what I meant by "clearly" is that some Deaf children's speech is really not understandable; it sounds more like gibberish. My point is that it would be impossible for this individual to go out and speak; the person receiving the information would not be able to comprehend.
 
You're right; it's a part of a lifestyle.
Yeah, but there's a difference between having therapy a few times weekly, vs. making therapy a lifestyle. (think the type of families who overprogram their kids)
Also, what I meant by "clearly" is that some Deaf children's speech is really not understandable; it sounds more like gibberish. My point is that it would be impossible for this individual to go out and speak; the person receiving the information would not be able to comprehend.
True....but even hearing people don't always speak clearly. I am only hoh, and most people unconsciously tend to hyperarticulate and enunicate when they are exposed to me. When I met my friend JT, I couldn't understand his speech too well, as it's not in my range, but now I can hear him pretty well on a phone.
Agreed.....it is impossible for some dhh kids to aquirre speech skills...I am not one of those "speech first" b/c sign is a "crutch" or special needs type people(you know, the Ling/ Flexer/Moog school of thought) ....I just think that speech training is an awesome idea since it gives a dhh kid an extra skill. I definitly think that speech training should be carefully monitored so that if a child isn't doing too well, then it can be stopped. I don't think ALL deaf kids can nessarly benifit from speech, but for the majority of those who DO get benifit, isn't it better to start it early on?
 
^Angel^ said:
Actually when a baby is first born, you can sign to your baby no matter if she/he couldn't understand...The earliest you do it the better your baby will grow up to learn it quite quicker than others....

I rather to speak and use ASL ,Not just ASL alone....


i absolutely agree with you! :thumb:
 
Back
Top