Originally Posted by Boult

Of course! in bi-bi it is like ASL first then reading/writing while spoken english (speech therapy or avt) is optional and not required. So it is not a level playing field but a lopsided.

Originally Posted by jillio

A bi-bi atmosphere is not determined by the spoken form of a language alone. And it is not a monolinguitic atmosphere, because various forms of English are used, along with ASL, which makes it a bilingual atmosphere. There is much more to English fluency and literacy than being able to speak.

And, this is not my opinion.

Originally Posted by jillio

How do you consider that to make the playing field lopsided? What I see as lopsided is the playing field that restricts the deaf child to a single language to the degree that speech skills are equated to literacy skills, thereby, having a negative impact on the child's education across domains.

Originally Posted by Boult

Of course! in bi-bi it is like ASL first then reading/writing while spoken english (speech therapy or avt) is optional and not required. So it is not a level playing field but a lopsided.

Originally Posted by shel90

I agreed but it doesnt matter to them cuz ASL is evil to them.

Originally Posted by rick48

Agreed, like I said earlier, calling it Bi-Bi is actually a misnomer. Also, why should my tax dollars be used to subsidize the teaching/indoctrination of any culture?

Rick

Originally Posted by rick48

Resorting to false labels only weakens your position. The program you described is ASL first and foremost and in reality little emphasis on the development of oral language and speech skills as evidenced by the fact tthat not only is your classroom instruction done in ASL but you do not even use your voice or at the very least mouth the words.

Originally Posted by shel90

Geez, people are so discriminating against ASL. Nothing new. They dont want to see how ASL has given Deaf children access to literacy, knowledge and so much more. They just see speech as being the primary goal.

Originally Posted by rick48

Resorting to false labels only weakens your position. The program you described is ASL first and foremost and in reality little emphasis on the development of oral language and speech skills as evidenced by the fact tthat not only is your classroom instruction done in ASL but you do not even use your voice or at the very least mouth the words.

Originally Posted by rick48

Agreed, like I said earlier, calling it Bi-Bi is actually a misnomer. Also, why should my tax dollars be used to subsidize the teaching/indoctrination of any culture?

Rick

Originally Posted by doubletrouble

I've got to tellyou, although I agree with you Jackie 90% of the time, this time I would have to disagree with you. To be quite honest, I would LOVE to have a teacher like Shel working with my son. Oral or not, because she (correct me if I'm wrong Shel and making an assumption) she is there for the kids- to help them succeed- no matter what the mode of communicaiton is. I would LOVE for my son to see a Deaf teacher in that role. I wouldn't object to it at all. After all, my opinion is that my son is in school to learn- albeit hie is mainstreamed and communicates orally, I don't think it's a terrible thing to have Shel teaching him. To me, it's just opening up another door for him and I think the rewards are BIG for my son and for Shel (hypothecially speaking of course). I don't get the sense that even though Shel maybe against CI's, she would ever hurt the success of a student by "holding a gruge". I am only saying this in my own personal experience, because my son's TOD is not there all day (he has another classroom teacher) and depending on the cirriculum, she either pulls in or pulls out. I think it could work, actually, and be a great experience for all.

Originally Posted by jillio

It is done everyday for hearing children. Why not for deaf children? Are your tax dollars more important that educating children? If so, I would suggest that education is the most effective way to insure that they become fully functioning adults that do not have to rely on any form of public assistance and dip into those precious tax coffers.

You claim that Bi-Bi is a misnomer. On exactly what basis? Have you visited various Bi-Bi programs? Do you have a degree in education? Do you have direct experience with anything other than oral only education?

Originally Posted by shel90

Just like u resort to false labels by calling us anti-CI.

Originally Posted by rick48

No particular culture is taught in our public school.

I am using Shel's own decsription of her program. As to other programs, I cannot speak as to them.

Originally Posted by rick48

No particular culture is taught in our public school.

I am using Shel's own decsription of her program. As to other programs, I cannot speak as to them.

Originally Posted by rick48

Shel,

Nice try but you are avoiding the issue.

Rick

Originally Posted by shel90

If only u knew ...if u have never visited a BiBi program, then how can u make claims like these?

Originally Posted by rick48

Again, I am referring to your program and the fact you have already admitted that you only use ASL in your classroom instruction and further you neither say your instructions in English or at the very least mouth the words.

If I am wrong, please correct me but you have made it clear that you do not use spoken English in your classroom instruction. I have no problem with that and could not care less, just that I fail to see how that is a bi-lingual approach to Education.
Rick

Originally Posted by shel90

History class???

We teach about Black history month, the history of America, cultural and traditions of American...we just add Deaf culture to it while public schools dont.

Originally Posted by rick48

Our students must take courses in both American and World History but there are no courses or inordinate amount of time spent on Irish culture, Catholic culture, Jewish culture, German culture, Black culture, Hispanic culture etc.

Originally Posted by shel90

Why waste time putting kids who have no understanding of spoken language in those speech classes? That would be a waste of their time.

Originally Posted by shel90

Same with our program..we dont spend an inordinate amount on Deaf culture. Just maybe for two to 4 weeks. We follow the public school curriculm on all subject areas ..just added Deaf culture to the curriculm.

Originally Posted by rick48

Unbelievable! Your students are only in 3rd grade and you have already written them off!

Like, I said, your program is bi-lingual in name only.

Rick

Originally Posted by rick48

Then I stand corrected but 2-4 weeks out of a 10 month curriculum hardly seems to warrant calling the program bi-cultural?

Originally Posted by rick48

Again, I am referring to your program and the fact you have already admitted that you only use ASL in your classroom instruction and further you neither say your instructions in English or at the very least mouth the words.

If I am wrong, please correct me but you have made it clear that you do not use spoken English in your classroom instruction. I have no problem with that and could not care less, just that I fail to see how that is a bi-lingual approach to Education.
Rick

Originally Posted by jillio

You don't teach history? Your public school doesn't teach the values of the hearing, white world, or to put it another way, the majority culture? What about implicit teaching? Do you have a guidance program in your public school systems? A guidance program seeks to install values and behaviors as deemed approporiate by the majority. This, as well, is culture.

Shel's description of her program is one that uses an L1 language to teach an L2 language. That is an apt description of any bilingual program.

Originally Posted by shel90

They have been in intensive speech training from birth to 5 years old...yet unable to develop speech skills. That is based on the speech assessments conducted by the speech therapists.

Why use precious time on something those kids have shown not to benefit from? We use the time with them on enriching their educational progress. I dont see how that is so bad?

Bilingual..kids are fluent in ASL and English.

Originally Posted by rick48

I have never read, heard or seen any reference to hearing in any of my children's social studies courses. Also, the majority culture is also a walking one but again never seen such a reference. "White world", sorry not going down that road.

The job of our Guidance department is not to instill values and behaviour deemed appropriate by the majority, maybe that is how it works in your hs but they are more concerned with making sure our kids graduate and getting them into the best colleges possible and they do a great job of that.

In our school district, we believe values are best taught at home.

Originally Posted by shel90

They have been in intensive speech training from birth to 5 years old...yet unable to develop speech skills. That is based on the speech assessments conducted by the speech therapists.

Why use precious time on something those kids have shown not to benefit from? We use the time with them on enriching their educational progress. I dont see how that is so bad?

Bilingual..kids are fluent in ASL and English.