Value of Cued English

N

netrox

New Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2003
Messages
4,769
Reaction score
0
I just wish we have more cued English programs here and be implemented at deaf schools:

"Leybaert and her colleagues (Alegria, Dejean, Capouillez, & Leybaert, 1990; Alegria, Lechat, & Leybaert, 1990; Charlier, 1992; Leybaert, 1993; Leybaert & Alegria, 1993; Leybaert & Alegria, 1995; Leybaert & Charlier, 1996; Perier, Charlier, Hage, & Alegria, 1988) have demonstrated that deaf individuals who have been exposed to Cued Speech both at home and at school perform comparably to hearing peers on tasks of phonemic awareness, internal speech recoding, phonics, and spelling and perform generally better than their deaf counterparts from oral or signing backgrounds. In a recently published study (LaSasso, Crain, & Leybaert, 2003), the rhyming abilities of deaf college students from Cued Speech backgrounds were comparable to those of their hearing peers and better than those of deaf students who came from non-Cued Speech backgrounds."

http://clerccenter2.gallaudet.edu/KidsWorldDeafNet/e-docs/Keys/cued.html

"Deaf and hard of hearing children who are immersed in English via cued English, on the other hand, acquire English vocabulary, syntax, English morphology, and idioms naturally through meaningful interactions with cuers of English. These words and structures are not taught through drill or direct instruction, but rather learned through conversations with people who cue to them. Their internalized knowledge of English phonology, syntax, morphology, vocabulary, and figurative language allows them to decode and predict words as they read."

http://clerccenter2.gallaudet.edu/KidsWorldDeafNet/e-docs/Keys/kyllo.html

-jeff
 
I was going to learn cued speech last year from one of the cued teachers in Utah. I am trying to build my skills in being fluent with ASL, MLS and Cued. I am going to school to become a Certified Deaf Interpreter.
 
Isn't Cued Speech essentially making phonetics visable? I am fasinated by Cued Speech, and would like to learn more.
 
Wouldn't mind trying it out for myself. Never have seen it in action. Although I do know one sign in Cued Speech but ain't enough.
 
I teased my 3 Hawaiian students that because they are good at ASL and they are good at performing their funny slap dance everytime there is a pep-rally or talent show, they can be great cued-speech interpreters! *slapSLAPslapSLAPslap!*

;)
 
my friend learned cued speech first before learning asl. she signed me in cued speech. unbelieveable... she s from nc btw.
 
Deaf258 said:
I am going to school to become a Certified Deaf Interpreter.
Click to expand...

Hey, that's awesome...but I had no idea CDIs were required to learn Cued Speech. In my ITP we barely touched on it and then moved on, although we did have a unit all about SEE sign. Since then I have never even seen Cued Speech, although I've seen and used SEE sign from time to time.

Do you need to learn this because it's the only way for many deaf kids to communicate? I'd love to know more. I know one Cued Speech interpreter in my area and I keep meaning to to go observe her at work (with permission of all involved, of course).
 
CUED speech was intended as quick solution for hearing parents with deaf child. That is how it started in the first placel Most hearing parent had trouble learning ASL so, they wanted "Overnight" course, so Cued speech course takes less than a week to learn for hearies!
I think its the easiest way to make deafies look like an idiot! So, I'd pass that idea!
 
diehardbiker65 said:
CUED speech was intended as quick solution for hearing parents with deaf child. That is how it started in the first placel Most hearing parent had trouble learning ASL so, they wanted "Overnight" course, so Cued speech course takes less than a week to learn for hearies!
I think its the easiest way to make deafies look like an idiot! So, I'd pass that idea!
Click to expand...

Typical Deaf Militant response.
 
diehardbiker65 said:
CUED speech was intended as quick solution for hearing parents with deaf child. That is how it started in the first placel Most hearing parent had trouble learning ASL so, they wanted "Overnight" course, so Cued speech course takes less than a week to learn for hearies!
I think its the easiest way to make deafies look like an idiot! So, I'd pass that idea!
Click to expand...

First of all, I am a deaf cuer and I also sign as well. Methinks you just don't want to look like an idiot because you don't know cued English.

The reason it's difficult to teach deaf adults cued English is because they lack the phonological model of English - they don't know how the words are supposed to be cued. Deaf kids learn to cue based on their consistent exposure to cued English, not based on the cued speech system itself. It takes time for them to "internalize" the phonological model of English and once they get it, they start to cue more and more and that's exactly when their English literacy really takes off.

Hearing people learn to cue faster because they ALREADY know English. If a deaf person ALREADY know English on a phonemic level, he will be able to cue but that is NOT the case with most deaf people.

You can get a German book and read the German words over and over and you will NEVER understand the words. People learn German best through NATURAL interaction with German speakers. That's the same with deaf kids learning English through natural interaction with cuers.

Even Kyllo wasn't comfortable with cued speech at first:

The use of cueing with learners who are deaf and hard of hearing cannot be discussed without acknowledging the emotional and personal reactions its use causes. Admittedly, I was one who initially was very uncomfortable with the idea of using Cued Speech with children who are deaf or hard of hearing... To me, the system initially looked odd and unnatural.

At a later date, however, when we—my colleagues and I— were faced with the data that deaf children immersed in English via cueing were consistently achieving higher literacy levels in English than deaf children in other programs, we determined that we had to put our attitudes of bias, ridicule, and skepticism aside. If literacy in English was possible as a result of immersion via cued English, we concluded such bias and ridicule was inappropriate and self-serving. Changing the paradigm regarding the language of instruction in the District 917 program was an emotional and difficult task and it did not occur overnight. We concluded, however, that we could no longer participate in practices that resulted in deficient language-learning environments for learners who need visual access to English and that contribute to the legacy of underachievement of many bright and talented deaf and hard of hearing individuals.
Click to expand...

She knew that Cued English helped deaf kids after observing deaf kids in different programs (cuers performed best) and she had to put her prejudices aside and as a result, it worked. She helped deaf kids become more literate.

-jeff
 
Also, in my school district, I was in a deaf program that used cued speech and deaf kids who used cued speech performed much better than deaf kids in signing program in the same district. The sign teacher used to be critical of cued speech but now she supports it after seeing all deaf cuers doing much better.

-jeff
 
netrox said:
Also, in my school district, I was in a deaf program that used cued speech and deaf kids who used cued speech performed much better than deaf kids in signing program in the same district. The sign teacher used to be critical of cued speech but now she supports it after seeing all deaf cuers doing much better.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious -- you say you are a signer and use cued speech. The study you mention appears to analyze the differences between those who signed and those who used cued speech. Was there any information about those who did both, such as yourself? Did you learn sign or cued speech first, if I may ask?
 
Interpretrator said:
I'm just curious -- you say you are a signer and use cued speech. The study you mention appears to analyze the differences between those who signed and those who used cued speech. Was there any information about those who did both, such as yourself? Did you learn sign or cued speech first, if I may ask?
Click to expand...

Actually, those studies don't say if cuers also sign but Kyllo's essay clearly shows they do use ASL as well.

I remember one survey saying that 80% of cuers also sign. I can't remember where it comes from and even more interesting is that many cuers also have parents who ALSO sign (some of them are professional ASL interpreters) but chose cued speech as a primary mode of communication with their deaf kids. I know two hearing mothers who cue exclusively (no sign language at all) to their kids even though they make a living as professional sign language interpreters. Ironic, isn't it?

I used both. My mom took ASL class but she never used it with me because I prefer her to keep using cued English.

That definitely puts an end to diehardbiker65's claim that parents only want to learn to cue because it's "easier." They learn to cue because they want their deaf children to learn English - their language. Parents have the right to teach their kids THEIR LANGUAGE. Cuem makes it happen!

-jeff
 
netrox said:
I know two hearing mothers who cue exclusively (no sign language at all) to their kids even though they make a living as professional sign language interpreters.
Click to expand...

That's...odd.

Anyway. I was just wondering because I know studies in this and other countries (like Sweden, where I believe SSL is more strongly supported than ASL is here) show that deaf students tend to do better when they learn ASL as their first language and English as their second. I believe that's what the bi-bi educational philosophy is about but I am not that well versed in it.

Also, I don't know if they're using Cued Speech, SEE, signed English, or other methods to each English as a Second Language. It would be interesting to see which methods produce the best results among students whose first language was ASL. I don't think I know anyone who was educated at a bi-bi school so I have no one to ask about it.

I'm not saying what people should do (I have my own preferences) but something tells me that if nothing else there should be way more professional studies done so educators and parents can see objectively what's best for their kids. With all the different options out there now, maybe in a generation or two we'll have enough data to figure things out better.
 
Interpretrator said:
Anyway. I was just wondering because I know studies in this and other countries (like Sweden, where I believe SSL is more strongly supported than ASL is here) show that deaf students tend to do better when they learn ASL as their first language and English as their second. I believe that's what the bi-bi educational philosophy is about but I am not that well versed in it.
Click to expand...

I don't know but I am sure if they used Cued Swedish there, they would do much better than they would if they used sign language. Also, keep in mind that 70% of deaf children born today are implanted and spoken Swedish is strongly emphasized.

http://www.batod.org.uk/index.php?id=/publications/on-linemagazine/models/sweden.htm

-jeff
 
Interpretrator said:
Hey, that's awesome...but I had no idea CDIs were required to learn Cued Speech. In my ITP we barely touched on it and then moved on, although we did have a unit all about SEE sign. Since then I have never even seen Cued Speech, although I've seen and used SEE sign from time to time.

Do you need to learn this because it's the only way for many deaf kids to communicate? I'd love to know more. I know one Cued Speech interpreter in my area and I keep meaning to to go observe her at work (with permission of all involved, of course).
Click to expand...


Actually, it is not a requirement, but if I had the Cued Speech skills, then I would be able to interpret for Cued people while I am watching ASL interpreter. The more skills and abilities I have, the more I get calls for doing interpreting jobs.
 
netrox said:
Also, keep in mind that 70% of deaf children born today are implanted and spoken Swedish is strongly emphasized.
Click to expand...

I see the 70% figure in the article. However, as to the second part of your statement, I quote the same article:

For all of them the aim is to be bilingual, with sign language and to read and write Swedish and for some also to use spoken Swedish. They all have Sign Language as a subject. Pupils who attend their local schools often get a chance to learn Sign Language if they want to.
Click to expand...

"...for some also to use spoken Swedish" does not sound like strong emphasis to me. That quote indicates that bilingualism is the emphasis. What part of the article indicates a "strong emphasis" on spoken Swedish?
 
Deaf258 said:
The more skills and abilities I have, the more I get calls for doing interpreting jobs.
Click to expand...

I understand. That's also why I'm sort of interested in Cued Speech, although apparently there is not much call for it in my area. I've heard there are only a couple of Cued Speech interpreters around here so I'm not sure if it's even worth it to learn it right now. (I feel I should be focusing on improving the skills I use every day.) Is it used a lot in Utah?
 
Very Valuable

Dr. Cornet, from Gallaudet University in the 60's was concerned with the literacy levels of deaf children.

CS has a profound effect on literacy.

Cued Speech can be learned is as little as 16 hours. With incentive a person can be a profecient cuer within 6 months.

Sign language does not support what the will child see on the lips, Cue speech does.

I believe that learning sign language can be a duanting task for parents when their child is first diagnosed. Family dynamics are complex affairs, establishing communication quickly is paramount.
 
Banjo, what is a "Deaf Militant?!" I admit my ignorance there.

Jeff, great article and I share the same views as many others in this thread.
 
Back
Top