What Resources Do You Use to find Info about CI?

rick48 said:
Marscharck does not say that bilingual education is not effective, what he says is that, contrary to popular opinion there is no evidence that bilingual programs enable deaf children to reach academic and language achievement levels comparable to their hearing peers. I believe he is referring to the type of bilingual program that utilizes ASL as the primary language with written English.

When he says that the deaf children with the best outcomes are those who had early exposure to sign language and to spoken language.* That is not a bilingual or bi-bi program that he was referring to above. A bibi program usually does not stress or sometimes even expose a deaf child to spoken language. Marscharck is saying the best outcomes come from those deaf children who early on receive exposure to both spoken and sign languages.

Not to be overlooked is the major point he makes later on:

"...the investigation also supported earlier findings indicating that better mother-child communication leads to better language skills among young children. Parent-child communication is usually the best predictor of child language learning, and whatever mode of communication is used with deaf children, this is primary."

Marschack is interesting as he was originally against childhood implantation and now recommends that children be implanted as soon as possible and then educated/raised with both ASL and spoken language. Sound familiar FJ and GrendelQ?
Happy Thanksgiving,
Rick
Click to expand...

To me, that's the true definition of what a bilingual program should be...ASL and spoken English. Many in the deaf education field do not agree, though. And I would support the spoken English with the use of cued speech as a source of modification. (I can actually envision some of the folks cringing as they read this, LOL). I really wonder...are there any deaf education programs that promote bilingual education in this sense? I know plenty that has "bi-bi" slapped on their agenda, being that it is ASL and written English...but spoken English? Has anyone heard of a bilingual program with ASL and spoken English? If so, please let me know.
 
deafbajagal said:
To me, that's the true definition of what a bilingual program should be...ASL and spoken English. Many in the deaf education field do not agree, though. And I would support the spoken English with the use of cued speech as a source of modification. (I can actually envision some of the folks cringing as they read this, LOL). I really wonder...are there any deaf education programs that promote bilingual education in this sense? I know plenty that has "bi-bi" slapped on their agenda, being that it is ASL and written English...but spoken English? Has anyone heard of a bilingual program with ASL and spoken English? If so, please let me know.
Click to expand...

My daughter is at a bi-bi school that has introduced an "acoustic access" program for students with CIs / HAs: part of the day is voices off, part integrates ASL and spoken English. They also cross age groups to accommodate different abilities.

But, despite her bilingual educational environment (with quite a bit more more emphasis on ASL), my child is exposed to so much more spoken language out and about (in stores, on the street, with extended family and friends, on TV/Movies, etc.) and is, therefore, picking up so much peripheral and incidental spoken language that we're taking extra efforts to provide some more directed learning in ASL, which is far less accessible to her in her non-academic environment.

I sat in and observed her day last week and was surprised to see that even when the teachers used only sign, these ASL-fluent CI kids consistently responded entirely in spoken language, talked among themselves in spoken language. They are frequently prompted to use sign. Her teachers explained that this is typical of what they find across the board with their CI kids. And it's why they have to enforce 'voices-off' in mixed classes, activities & groups, bc the kids will forget that not everyone can access spoken language and gravitate towards speaking, and they don't want communication gaps across the acoustic and non-acoustic kids/teachers.
 
GrendelQ said:
My daughter is at a bi-bi school that has introduced an "acoustic access" program for students with CIs / HAs: part of the day is voices off, part integrates ASL and spoken English. They also cross age groups to accommodate different abilities.

But, despite her bilingual educational environment (with quite a bit more more emphasis on ASL), my child is exposed to so much more spoken language out and about (in stores, on the street, with extended family and friends, on TV/Movies, etc.) and is, therefore, picking up so much peripheral and incidental spoken language that we're taking extra efforts to provide some more directed learning in ASL, which is far less accessible to her in her non-academic environment.

I sat in and observed her day last week and was surprised to see that even when the teachers used only sign, these ASL-fluent CI kids consistently responded entirely in spoken language, talked among themselves in spoken language. They are frequently prompted to use sign. Her teachers explained that this is typical of what they find across the board with their CI kids. And it's why they have to enforce 'voices-off' in mixed classes, activities & groups, bc the kids will forget that not everyone can access spoken language and gravitate towards speaking, and they don't want communication gaps across the acoustic and non-acoustic kids/teachers.
Click to expand...
How about separating non-acoustic with that of acoustic kids and teachers for a change? Both groups can still sign but not worry about these "voice off" sessions.
 
Wirelessly posted

what is your solution deafgal? Allow the asl using kids to be left out of the conversations by the ci kids? How about forbid the ci kids from using spoken language? Both of those are inappropriate.
 
faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted

what is your solution deafgal? Allow the asl using kids to be left out of the conversations by the ci kids? How about forbid the ci kids from using spoken language? Both of those are inappropriate.
Click to expand...

Don't be silly, GQ mentioned it was BiBi/verbal school. That means not all classes are voice off. it's just voice off when it is a mixed class.

if you think it is inappropriate, then French classes should not be "English Off"

Not neccessary to divide the school even further.
 
Back
Top