loml

shel90- With all due respect, you have named the approach but supplied no details of what is involved for a deaf child have success orally, as in speech.

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet

Deafness

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

shel90

See post #172 #205 #217 #223 #227

Some details are there. If it is not enough, let me know and I can try to give u them.

__________________
~Shel~

loml

shel90- Thank you for providing me the post number. I read how hard you work in supporting the learning of English via ASL.

As people have stated on the board they support a combination of ASL & oral programs.

What are the components and how would you maintain successful program of oral/speech skills for deaf/hoh children?

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet

flip

Good point, we all can define a word different. To me, oral = spoken language approach to communicating. It's hard for me to not think of the term "oralism" the moment you tell hearing parents that ASL is unhealthy as a first language for their child, and instead promote a spoken language approach to communication.

ASL is used for instructions and group chatting for everyone most of the time. Speech training is given individually, and used in one to one or group conversation depending on the skills. Many of the deaf children in bi-bi programs use a lot of speech at home and other activities in clubs or in the neighbourhood. It's interesting that increasing findings points in a direction where deaf students from bi-bi programs have better oral skills than those from oral programs(cued speech didn't seem to help a lot in those oral programs?). I think you should visit a true bi-bi program to understand what goes on in the classroom, and perhaps ask them about their experiences with cued speech. I am sure Jillio and Shel can give you some names if you truly are interested?

I have never said cued speech is bad for deaf children, and really don't care if they use cued speech or not, but you keep on saying ASL is bad for literacy. I have problems with the hostility toward ASL from you, National Cued Speech Association and AG Bell.

jillio

Thank you! To even attempt to imply that it isn't is nothing sort of absurd!

And, yes, it could have a role in a bi-bi environment as a tool for teaching English as an L2 langauage. But loml pproposes its use for language acquisition. That is a very dangerous proposition where a deaf child's access to whole language is the issue.

jillio

None taken, Cheri. That is why it is my practice to ask the deaf what they find most useful and best for their needs, and listen to what they tell me.

jillio

No interpretation needed, loml. You have stated your position in English, I have read it in English. I daresay my command of English is sufficient to see not only the the actual meaning of your posts, but the implied meaning, as well.

My understanding of your posts is not my understanding only. There are numerous others whpo view your bomardment of CS posts in the same way I do. Shall I refewr you to some of the replies made to you by deaf members, as well as other hearing members? The fact of the matter is, you are not convincing people of what a wonderful tool CS can be, you are alientating people. Perhaps if you changed your tack, and attempted to discuss CS as apossible tool in the learning of English as a second language, rather than continuing to insist that it is some sort of panacea that wilol cure all the problems of language acquisition and literacy experienced by the deaf child, you would gain some greater degree of acceptance for your views. And a little empirical evidence wouldn't hurt,either.

jillio

That does not mitigate the fact, that in nearly all of your posts, you recommend that ASL be learned after the child has learned English. Yous till propose that a deaf child learn an oral language prior to a signed language. That is what makes your view and oralist one. And one that continues to mire deaf chidlren in language deprivation.

jillio

It has been explained over and over again. Loml simply refuses to comprehend the explanation. She is being puprosely obtuse.

jillio

Ay, there's the rub. Your concern is what it takes for a deaf child to be an oral success. The concern of advocates for Bi-Bi are concerned with what it takes for a child to be a success academically, socially, vocationally, and personally. Quite a different situations. We see deaf children as holistic beings with many needs. You see them as ears and a mouth.

And here you go with the contradictions again. First CS is not a tool for speech, then it is a tool for speech.

Cheri

Yes, You do listen to us, our experiences, our stories, and how to improve the future of deaf generations, so we can reduce the awkwardness and frustration for them.

__________________

jillio

Thank you, my friend. I try! Don't always get it right, but I try!

shel90

Here you go, loml. Flip has explained how speech is fitted in the BiBi programs. I am ...I thought your primary focus wasnt on the development of speech and now it is?


Speech training is conducted by educators who have the training and expertise in speech development. We have speech educators at our program to provide those services for those who will benefit from speech training.

However, the classroom teachers are responsible for delivering the instruction of the core curriculm. For a teacher to claim that they are qualified to teach speech without any speech training background makes it go against the code of ethics of education.

__________________
~Shel~

jillio

Bingo!

deafskeptic

Shel, I think you could throw a whole library of facts, research and books at her and Loml will ignore everything and keep trying to spread the gospel of Cued Speech as the salvation to deaf illiterate deaf kids despite our annoyance at her annoying witnessing of Cued Speech.

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.

loml

shel90 - My focus isn't speech, you are quite correct.

Thank you shel90.

Are you of the opinion that the speech/oral program is meeting the needs of the students shel90? If not,what do you see as possible enhancements for the program to ensure success?

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet

shel90

There is always always room for improvement with any programs. We work hard to ensure that every needs are met...our big problem is the influx of students being referred to our program at an older age who have fell so far behind academically or are language delayed. Those needs are very very difficult to meet because they have a wide range of issues that need to be addressed first.

For those who have started in our program, yes their needs are being met. Some kids were able to develop speech skills..it really depends on the child. Some children just do not have the innate ability to develop speech skills but we do always give every child a chance at the opportunity.

__________________
~Shel~

jillio

How many times does one have to say the same thing before you understand it?

loml

flip - Again, I do not present Cued Speech as oralism, understand please that you need not voice when you cue. ASL is unhealthy, unhealthy, honestly you take this to an odd level. Do you agree that ASL is a foreign language? Do you agree that the learning of ASL can/is a difficult venture for some/most hearing families?

I promote a system that gives visual, kinesthetic and some auditory(although of course not always the case), for hearing parents to use as an early intervention tool with their deaf child. For you somehow this is a bad thing?


flip - I am fimiliar with the programs locally that call themselves "bi/bi". As I have said before, nice on paper, but not necessarily the "real deal". Frankly flip, the child needs to have access to language way before they get to school. The language of their family from their family and ASL from a Deaf role model fluent in ASL, preferably.


I have never said cued speech is bad for deaf children, and really don't care if they use cued speech or not, but you keep on saying ASL is bad for literacy. I have problems with the hostility toward ASL from you, National Cued Speech Association and AG Bell.[/quote]


flip - Certainly reads that way for me. I habour no hostility toward ASL, a language cannot in and of itself be bad.

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet

loml

jillio - As I have posted on numerous occassions, I share information regarding Cued Speech.

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet

loml

Thank you shel90.

If I recall, you have stated that some of these children with language delays can be coined "oral failures". I believe you also support oral skills for deaf children, what do you beleive needs to happen for these children, so that they are not "oral failures"?

__________________
- Dr. Edward C. Merrill, Jr. past president of Gallaudet