SEE (Signing Exact English) is the best sign language for a child to start with.. - Page 4

***VamPyroX*** · 12-28-2010, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

One thing I have observed in "mainstream" schools is that Deaf students are being taught English reading and writing the same way the hearing students are taught. Mainstream is a nice philosophy but it falls short as a reality.

Young Deaf students need reading and writing classes that are tailored specifically for them. They can merge in with "mainstream" English classes later, at the high school level, for grammar refinement and appreciation of literature. But they really need to get the fundamentals of English firmly established at the elementary level first. Otherwise, they're always playing catch up, or being socially promoted.

IMO

What do you mean when it's tailored specifically for them?

I've seen deaf students who are given too much leeway when doing classwork. If a deaf student does poorly on a subject, instead of encouraging that student to try harder... they make the subject easier or let the student repeat it until he passes it. At the end (no matter how horrible the student does), the student is advanced to the next grade in school. As a result, they graduate high school with an education level 3 to 7 years behind.

When I failed English, they gave me 2 choices... take summer school (and pass) or repeat the same grade the next year. I took summer school and got caught up. I only did that once and learned my lesson. I ended up doing well the next year that I was waived from taking my finals.

Buffalo · 12-29-2010, 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VamPyroX

What do you mean when it's tailored specifically for them?

I've seen deaf students who are given too much leeway when doing classwork. If a deaf student does poorly on a subject, instead of encouraging that student to try harder... they make the subject easier or let the student repeat it until he passes it. At the end (no matter how horrible the student does), the student is advanced to the next grade in school. As a result, they graduate high school with an education level 3 to 7 years behind.

When I failed English, they gave me 2 choices... take summer school (and pass) or repeat the same grade the next year. I took summer school and got caught up. I only did that once and learned my lesson. I ended up doing well the next year that I was waived from taking my finals.

ASL and anything visual to help them learn.

Yes, I have seen that teachers can be too lenient with the deaf students because they are feeling sorry for them. They shouldn't! That is why I rather see more of deaf teachers. They usually don't feel sorry for the kids and they make great role models.

deafbajagal · 12-29-2010, 12:34 PM

At my current school, we are not "allowed" to fail a student.

WTF?

deafbajagal · 12-29-2010, 12:35 PM

Let me rephrase that...we don't give kids a "F." They earned the "F". But we're not allowed to have a "F" on the grades without "permission." It's not right.

LinuxGold · 12-29-2010, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

At my current school, we are not "allowed" to fail a student.

WTF?

*cough* what? Wait, let me drink something --

**Reba** · 12-29-2010, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VamPyroX

What do you mean when it's tailored specifically for them?

I mean using teaching techniques that better fit the learning styles of deaf students. More emphasis on visual and hands-on methods rather than oral/aural, for example.

Quote:

I've seen deaf students who are given too much leeway when doing classwork. If a deaf student does poorly on a subject, instead of encouraging that student to try harder... they make the subject easier or let the student repeat it until he passes it.

I definitely don't support that. That doesn't benefit the student at all.

**Reba** · 12-29-2010, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LinuxGold

*cough* what? Wait, let me drink something --

If it's water, pass some to me. That statement touched my gag reflex, too. *cough*

**Reba** · 12-29-2010, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

Let me rephrase that...we don't give kids a "F." They earned the "F". But we're not allowed to have a "F" on the grades without "permission." It's not right.

Who gives the "permission?"

**Banjo** · 12-29-2010, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Who gives the "permission?"

Hopefully not the parents.

deafbajagal · 12-29-2010, 12:53 PM

Admin. Sometimes they will convene an IEP meeting to make sure we are following all the modifications. Which is bullshit.

1. I'm a certified teacher of the deaf and I do my job. I DO follow mods, even though, technically, for a special education classroom, you do not need the modification page from the IEP because that page is designed for the regular education classroom...
2. Some kids are just LAZY and don't want to do their work...I'm qualified to make that determination.
3. If a child is really struggling due to his/her disability, I would have convened an IEP meeting long before the report card is due.

I've had kids flat out tell me..."you can't give me an "F" in this school" with smirks on their faces.

Well, I did get "permission" to put Fs on their report cards. When the parents called (oh, boy they were mad!) and asked why I gave their kids "Fs" I shot back, I didn't! They EARNED their Fs.

The next grading period, almost all of them started turning in assignments, studying for their tests, and oh my! EARNED their good grades.

posts from hell · 12-29-2010, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

Admin. Sometimes they will convene an IEP meeting to make sure we are following all the modifications. Which is bullshit.

1. I'm a certified teacher of the deaf and I do my job. I DO follow mods, even though, technically, for a special education classroom, you do not need the modification page from the IEP because that page is designed for the regular education classroom...
2. Some kids are just LAZY and don't want to do their work...I'm qualified to make that determination.
3. If a child is really struggling due to his/her disability, I would have convened an IEP meeting long before the report card is due.

I've had kids flat out tell me..."you can't give me an "F" in this school" with smirks on their faces.

Well, I did get "permission" to put Fs on their report cards. When the parents called (oh, boy they were mad!) and asked why I gave their kids "Fs" I shot back, I didn't! They EARNED their Fs.

The next grading period, almost all of them started turning in assignments, studying for their tests, and oh my! EARNED their good grades.

That was the reason I got an I on my report card... In my entire high school I havent gotten a F but an I. But the strange thing - 2nd quarter of the semester i got an A and the overall semester grade was an A. So needless to say a lot of teachers knew I was taking full advantage of the system.

jillio · 12-29-2010, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

Admin. Sometimes they will convene an IEP meeting to make sure we are following all the modifications. Which is bullshit.

1. I'm a certified teacher of the deaf and I do my job. I DO follow mods, even though, technically, for a special education classroom, you do not need the modification page from the IEP because that page is designed for the regular education classroom...
2. Some kids are just LAZY and don't want to do their work...I'm qualified to make that determination.
3. If a child is really struggling due to his/her disability, I would have convened an IEP meeting long before the report card is due.

I've had kids flat out tell me..."you can't give me an "F" in this school" with smirks on their faces.

Well, I did get "permission" to put Fs on their report cards. When the parents called (oh, boy they were mad!) and asked why I gave their kids "Fs" I shot back, I didn't! They EARNED their Fs.

The next grading period, almost all of them started turning in assignments, studying for their tests, and oh my! EARNED their good grades.

The IEP is a mixed bag. One the one hand, it protects the student from not getting any services at all. On the other hand, it is so important to admin to meet the goals listed that educators are encouraged to "inflate" **ahem** the actual progress being made toward those goals.

**shel90** · 12-29-2010, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

Admin. Sometimes they will convene an IEP meeting to make sure we are following all the modifications. Which is bullshit.

1. I'm a certified teacher of the deaf and I do my job. I DO follow mods, even though, technically, for a special education classroom, you do not need the modification page from the IEP because that page is designed for the regular education classroom...
2. Some kids are just LAZY and don't want to do their work...I'm qualified to make that determination.
3. If a child is really struggling due to his/her disability, I would have convened an IEP meeting long before the report card is due.

I've had kids flat out tell me..."you can't give me an "F" in this school" with smirks on their faces.

Well, I did get "permission" to put Fs on their report cards. When the parents called (oh, boy they were mad!) and asked why I gave their kids "Fs" I shot back, I didn't! They EARNED their Fs.

The next grading period, almost all of them started turning in assignments, studying for their tests, and oh my! EARNED their good grades.

I have given "F"'s out in report cards when I felt it was justified. I always kept proof/documents just in case and that usually shuts certain people up.

jillio · 12-30-2010, 12:36 AM

Anyone else notice that with the increase in implanted children there also seems to be an increase in digging up old and outdated methods of communication and teaching language? SEE hasn't been an issue for years. The deaf educational establishment has come to a consensus several years ago that TC was one of the worst things to happen to deaf ed. All of a sudden, they are being drug back into the spotlight. CS was there for awhile, too, and being touted as a communication method. It has dropped back out of the spotlight, and the other two seem to be taking it's place.

Shoot me if you will, but I believe this is happening because people are putting unrealistic hopes, whether they admit it or not, on the CI making their child more hearing than any other child before them. These things will work for their kids because technology has changed the way a deaf kid functions. And I find that to be a damned shame, because all it means is we will have yet another generation of deaf kids not getting their needs met.

jillio · 12-30-2010, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

I have given "F"'s out in report cards when I felt it was justified. I always kept proof/documents just in case and that usually shuts certain people up.

As well you should. Why should you not have the same expectations for academic performance for a deaf student that teachers have for a hearing student? Especially in a bi-bi arena. Expect a kid to perform poorly and they will. Expect them to make their best effort and they will. Cheat them out of an opportunity for a full education and pass them on for convenience sake and you have no right to call yourself an educator.

SilenceGold · 02-08-2011, 05:09 PM

Back to my original statement - SEE is still the best sign language a child should start with. So far, I have not heard anything or seen evidence that disagrees. :p

**shel90** · 02-08-2011, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilenceGold

Back to my original statement - SEE is still the best sign language a child should start with. So far, I have not heard anything or seen evidence that disagrees. :p

One example....

Signing "FACE" for the actual face and then "BOOK" for an actual book to represent the social network, Facebook is linguistically confusing. Another is signing "SUPER" as in someone is super and then "BOWL" for an actual bowl to respresent the football game, Superbowl. Those are the few examples out of many that makes SEE rebundant.

02-08-2011, 06:45 PM

SEE eh? That's a new one to me. Over here across the pond we call it SSE. Sign Supported English.

AlleyCat · 02-08-2011, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilenceGold

Back to my original statement - SEE is still the best sign language a child should start with. So far, I have not heard anything or seen evidence that disagrees. :p

Sorry, but just about everyone disagrees.

You would be okay with a child learning and using the sign for break, and fast, to convey breakfast? Should the child learn spoken skills, that wouldn't even be spoken right.

Or hot and dog to convey a hot dog? The child will learn that as a hot canine.

Or a pen and and a man and a ship to convey penmanship? Even when none of those individual signs even comes remotely close to what penmanship means?

We could go on and on.

katz4life · 02-08-2011, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by posts from hell

First, one must keep in mind... Average high school graduates are reading at a 6th-7th grade level.

50% of Americans can't read at the 8th grade level. 46% of Americans cannot understand the language used on their Rx bottle.

So, now.

That explains why USA Today newspaper contain articles are written on a ninth grade level.

chipmunkis · 02-08-2011, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilenceGold

Back to my original statement - SEE is still the best sign language a child should start with. So far, I have not heard anything or seen evidence that disagrees. :p

I am hearing, and a Deafblind Intervenor who uses sign language with my students... and I would NEVER use SEE with them. It is inaccurate, and cumbersome. It is not an actual language, merely a manual representation of English.
AlleyCat says it well:

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlleyCat

Sorry, but just about everyone disagrees.

You would be okay with a child learning and using the sign for break, and fast, to convey breakfast? Should the child learn spoken skills, that wouldn't even be spoken right.

Or hot and dog to convey a hot dog? The child will learn that as a hot canine.

Or a pen and and a man and a ship to convey penmanship? Even when none of those individual signs even comes remotely close to what penmanship means?

We could go on and on.

posts from hell · 02-09-2011, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

One example....

Signing "FACE" for the actual face and then "BOOK" for an actual book to represent the social network, Facebook is linguistically confusing. Another is signing "SUPER" as in someone is super and then "BOWL" for an actual bowl to respresent the football game, Superbowl. Those are the few examples out of many that makes SEE rebundant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlleyCat

Sorry, but just about everyone disagrees.

You would be okay with a child learning and using the sign for break, and fast, to convey breakfast? Should the child learn spoken skills, that wouldn't even be spoken right.

Or hot and dog to convey a hot dog? The child will learn that as a hot canine.

Or a pen and and a man and a ship to convey penmanship? Even when none of those individual signs even comes remotely close to what penmanship means?

We could go on and on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chipmunkis

I am hearing, and a Deafblind Intervenor who uses sign language with my students... and I would NEVER use SEE with them. It is inaccurate, and cumbersome. It is not an actual language, merely a manual representation of English.
AlleyCat says it well:

Hence the reason I am not going to waste any more time in this thread.

BecLak · 02-09-2011, 05:10 AM

Wirelessly posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

Then, by your definition, I'm extremely unintelligent and a backward-thinker. Which is fine by me. Luckily I know better than to be defined by numbers and systems. I define myself.

Measuring intelligence with language and/or communication mode isn't advisable. That is exactly how the misconstrued views of what intelligence really means started from. Especially for deaf people.

You can't speak, therefore you are dumb. The more you know English, the smarter you are. Those myths thrive, even today. It's perfectly fine if someone is incompetent in English but is fluent in ASL. English is NOT superior to ASL. It's not a hearing world. It's a world full of many languages. And ASL is one of them. If a deaf person can't read or write at all but is very fluent in ASL, then my hat is off to him/her. Being fluent in one language is better than being "okay" in two languages.

+1

:applaud:

BecLak · 02-09-2011, 05:17 AM

Wirelessly posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilenceGold

Quote:

Originally Posted by deafbajagal

Then, by your definition, I'm extremely unintelligent and a backward-thinker. Which is fine by me. Luckily I know better than to be defined by numbers and systems. I define myself.

Measuring intelligence with language and/or communication mode isn't advisable. That is exactly how the misconstrued views of what intelligence really means started from. Especially for deaf people.

You can't speak, therefore you are dumb. The more you know English, the smarter you are. Those myths thrive, even today. It's perfectly fine if someone is incompetent in English but is fluent in ASL. English is NOT superior to ASL. It's not a hearing world. It's a world full of many languages. And ASL is one of them. If a deaf person can't read or write at all but is very fluent in ASL, then my hat is off to him/her. Being fluent in one language is better than being "okay" in two languages.

No - You are able to obtain knowledge independently because you already was a proficient user of English when you graduated from high school. It is because you're not one of those who has went through a life of using only ASL and went through a state sponsored deaf school the entire time. Therefore, you have been able to master reading a novel, self educational, or any other reading materials at time of graduation. Also you have some education from college that is "different" than most of the college education that other pro-ASL students would acquire - they had more dependency on ASL than you did.

I have been hoping to find SOMEONE who, only used ASL their entire life and never had oral education, had achieved the ability to be a "forward thinker"..it would prove my opinion about the importance of SEE being wrong.

Forward thinking as you phrase it is not acquired by mastering language but generally by parental teaching of life observations. It has nothing to do with the acquisition of language.

jillio · 02-09-2011, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilenceGold

Back to my original statement - SEE is still the best sign language a child should start with. So far, I have not heard anything or seen evidence that disagrees. :p

Then you aren't looking. Just because you choose to stick your head in the sand doesn't mean the elephant isn't standing right in front of you.

SEE is not a sign language. SEE is manually coded English. That is the basic difference that makes it innappropriate in anything but an English teaching situation.

jillio · 02-09-2011, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeafidomUK

SEE eh? That's a new one to me. Over here across the pond we call it SSE. Sign Supported English.

Sign Supported English is not exactly the same thing. SEE I and SEE II are systems that were designed by the hearing and they have features that no other sign system has. Sign Supported English is more of a TC concept, and the sign system used is generally more of a Pigin Sign.

jillio · 02-09-2011, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlleyCat

Sorry, but just about everyone disagrees.

You would be okay with a child learning and using the sign for break, and fast, to convey breakfast? Should the child learn spoken skills, that wouldn't even be spoken right.

Or hot and dog to convey a hot dog? The child will learn that as a hot canine.

Or a pen and and a man and a ship to convey penmanship? Even when none of those individual signs even comes remotely close to what penmanship means?

We could go on and on.

I always use the "nose running" example in explaining why manually coded English doesn't work, but I love your examples. Mind if I incorporate them into my explanations?

See there? You guys are still teaching me!

jillio · 02-09-2011, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katz4life

That explains why USA Today newspaper contain articles are written on a ninth grade level.

And your average newpaper writes for a 4th grade level of reading comprehension. Sad, isn't it? How do these hearing people expect to increase the literacy of deaf kids by using hearing techniques when they can't even increase the literacy of the hearing kids?

jillio · 02-09-2011, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BecLak

Wirelessly posted

Forward thinking as you phrase it is not acquired by mastering language but generally by parental teaching of life observations. It has nothing to do with the acquisition of language.

Exactly. Action and consequence. Unfortunately, there are too many inconsistent parents out there these days, and kids are not learning this very basic concept.

AlleyCat · 02-09-2011, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I always use the "nose running" example in explaining why manually coded English doesn't work, but I love your examples. Mind if I incorporate them into my explanations?

See there? You guys are still teaching me!

Absolutely do not mind!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

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

12-29-2010, 12:34 PM	#93 (permalink)
deafbajagal Registered User Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: USA Posts: 5,171	At my current school, we are not "allowed" to fail a student. WTF?

12-29-2010, 12:35 PM	#94 (permalink)
deafbajagal Registered User Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: USA Posts: 5,171	Let me rephrase that...we don't give kids a "F." They earned the "F". But we're not allowed to have a "F" on the grades without "permission." It's not right.

12-29-2010, 12:53 PM	#100 (permalink)
deafbajagal Registered User Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: USA Posts: 5,171	Admin. Sometimes they will convene an IEP meeting to make sure we are following all the modifications. Which is bullshit. 1. I'm a certified teacher of the deaf and I do my job. I DO follow mods, even though, technically, for a special education classroom, you do not need the modification page from the IEP because that page is designed for the regular education classroom... 2. Some kids are just LAZY and don't want to do their work...I'm qualified to make that determination. 3. If a child is really struggling due to his/her disability, I would have convened an IEP meeting long before the report card is due. I've had kids flat out tell me..."you can't give me an "F" in this school" with smirks on their faces. Well, I did get "permission" to put Fs on their report cards. When the parents called (oh, boy they were mad!) and asked why I gave their kids "Fs" I shot back, I didn't! They EARNED their Fs. The next grading period, almost all of them started turning in assignments, studying for their tests, and oh my! EARNED their good grades.

12-30-2010, 12:36 AM	#104 (permalink)
jillio Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 60,296	Anyone else notice that with the increase in implanted children there also seems to be an increase in digging up old and outdated methods of communication and teaching language? SEE hasn't been an issue for years. The deaf educational establishment has come to a consensus several years ago that TC was one of the worst things to happen to deaf ed. All of a sudden, they are being drug back into the spotlight. CS was there for awhile, too, and being touted as a communication method. It has dropped back out of the spotlight, and the other two seem to be taking it's place. Shoot me if you will, but I believe this is happening because people are putting unrealistic hopes, whether they admit it or not, on the CI making their child more hearing than any other child before them. These things will work for their kids because technology has changed the way a deaf kid functions. And I find that to be a damned shame, because all it means is we will have yet another generation of deaf kids not getting their needs met.

02-08-2011, 05:09 PM	#106 (permalink)
SilenceGold Registered User Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 3,508	Back to my original statement - SEE is still the best sign language a child should start with. So far, I have not heard anything or seen evidence that disagrees. :p

02-08-2011, 06:45 PM	#108 (permalink)
DeafidomUK Guest Posts: n/a	SEE eh? That's a new one to me. Over here across the pond we call it SSE. Sign Supported English.