loml

Mookie,

There does not seem to be a consistant TC model. At least that has been my experience. I would say the same of supposed bi-bi programs. I simply want to know just exactly what methods are being incorporated. Fair enough?

__________________
- 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

rockdrummer

No you didn't say all of but it is implied by how you chose your words. Your qoute implies that all hearing parents are to lazy. You should say SOME hearing parents are to lazy to learn ASL.

And I agree that ASL is more efficient but I also understand the importance of SEE in teaching literacy. Wouldn't you agree?

rockdrummer

Iomi, My understanding of Total Communications is that the approach is to try any and all methods and gravitate towards the one(s) that work.

Mookie

If you wish your kid would write a wonderful English language, he needs to practice with you at home. Not many school educators would assist your son very much since they only earn their paychecks.

I strongly suggest you to watch perfect example from the A River Runs Through It (1992).

There is nothing wrong with father and/or mother to sit with deaf child daily for practicing the writing skills. Parents are responsible to teach their children. Not Educators with their impressive college degrees.

What's wrong with 15/30-minute drill daily?

Moreover, there is nothing wrong with ASL, too.

gnulinuxman

Possibly, but it is possible for hearing people to understand ASL with practice.

__________________
--Danny

loml

rockdrummer,

Thankyou for your clarification. Do you mind telling me how long your son has been in the program. Can the program show you statistically what the literacy results are? What goals has the program set for your son? What exactly are the certifications of the staff? TODs? college??? What is their position on inclusion? These are questions that they should be able to provide you accurate answers for. You have every right to ask. (okay I am stopping for now )

Myself, I am not a fan of TC as defined in your post. I believe that the child needs a complete accurate access to language by native users of the choosen language.

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

Cousin Vinny

I wouldn't go that far in endorsing SEE in promoting literacy among young DHH students. Check an earlier AD reply of mine;

ASL v. ESE Study Reply

loml

Eyeth,

Could you expand on this please.

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

deafdyke

loml, ASL IS a real language!!!!!!! Compare the writing of an ASLer to the English usage of someone who speaks another language, and you'll see a hell of a lot of simalirties. Even many ORAL kids have trouble expressing themsleves in writing......

Cousin Vinny

If I remember correctly, you advocate the Cued Speech approach. I wonder if you have observed SEE usage, either personally or in a classroom setting? If you have, you'll know why people refer SEE and its variants to be artifical sign language systems. It really is that stilted and actually 'interrupts' the natural flow of sign language.

And yes, I have been exposed to teachers using the SEE method, and as well as ASL. By far, me and my peers seem to 'understand' ASL teachers better and more naturally, as opposed to SEE teachers. I find it more difficult to follow instruction done under a SEE method and get 'fatigued'. Undoubtedly, some of my peers, instead of becoming 'fatigued', just simply gloss over the subject matter and not really comprehending anything substantative.

In addition to fatigue, it does appear that excessive prompting, in overcoming the 'artificialness' of the communications method, is more prevalent in SEE than ASL. (Personally, I've never really have observed excessive 'prompting'. Mostly, I see 'glassy-eyed' students, and find it difficult in determining if they really understood the subject matter being discussed.

However, the vast majority of Deaf instruction I've received, and have observed, was the middle of the road variety; Using PSE in conjunction with voicing. I'm not really a fan of that method either, but this is a common communications method as used in the DHH classrooms, especially at Deaf institutions and Gallaudet.

Granted, I'm drawing from anecdotal experience. As I've pointed out in an earlier link, there are studies done on SEE and ASL usage in the classroom, and it pretty much confirms my suspicions and observations about SEE usage in a formal educational setting.

That all said, I would use SEE only in limited quantities; For example, on a one-on-one basis, tutoring a DHH student in English, I would use SEE to read a sentence or two, just to get the 'nuances' of English in a visual form.

Mookie

Eyeth

loml

Indeed I have observed SEE in the classroom and in a personal setting. I am aware that SEE and the likes thereof, are often deemed artificial language. Having said that, I have yet to meet any professional users stating SEE/SEEII is a language. Rather, they view it as a visual representation of spoken English. "sign what you say & one English equivalent" With regards to the "natural flow of sign language", personally, I think that is debatable, skill level of the signer being the largest variable for me.

I agree SEE/SEEII is a fatiguing method, both receptively and in delivery. In fact one of my personal reasons for advocating CS. Your "understanding" of the ASL teacher better and more naturally is an interesting comment to me. I am curious as to your language learning process. IE: post-lingual/pre-lingual English/ASL Would you be comfortable sharing this with me?

The coined phrase "excessive prompting", and "artificialness" of the communication method, quite frankly what is that suppose to mean?

In addition to your comments, it is troubling to know that the majority of Deaf instruction is the "quality" of the PSE method.

Many of the parents of deaf children in my area, are insisting on SEE/SEEII in the classroom. Unfortunately there are no "standards' for SEE/SEEII that have to be met in order for people to be the interpreter/transliterator. The dhh child pays an enormous price for other peoples egos.

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

rockdrummer

This all gets more confusing as time goes on. I know for a fact and have witnessed that some deaf folks are not proficient in proper English which I will term for the sake of argument as "literacy” The ability to read and write proper English. I understand why this happens based on my understanding of ASL and how it conceptually differs from the English language. So the question I would pose to those that are deaf and literate is - what is the best method to learn to read and write proper English? Or not necessarily what is best but what worked for you?

Cousin Vinny

I went to a Deaf institution (FSD) and am pre-lingually deafened. Prior to enrolling in school, my mother would sit down with me every night and go over vocabulary exercises. I think that was the single biggest boost for me in 'acquiring' English as my native language.Forgive me for going overly pedantic here, and allow me to illustrate an example:

Let's say the teacher is reciting from a History text, say, about one particular event during the American Revolution. It could be as long as two to three paragraphs. The teacher uses SEE and faithfully transliterates the history text for DHH students to comprehend.

Assuming it is a 'perfect' class of DHH students, where they actually engage in classroom discourse, and are otherwise highly intelligent. By the time the teacher finishes the 1st or 2nd sentence, fatigue settles in, and students begin to miss information. As a result, they 'prompt' the teacher for clarification. By the time the teacher is onto the 2nd paragraph, the students are 'prompting' him to 'reclarify' the 1st paragraph (preferably in ASL!), and so on.

However, if ASL is used in the same classroom with the same history text, less prompting and more discussions take place. By the time the teacher is done translating the 1st paragraph, a student or two may chime in with an opinion, comment, etc. And the discourse between teacher and student is enhanced. Prompting may still happen, but at a much lower level than what SEE would exact from an similiar audience using a similiar story.

However, in actual practice, I rarely see the 'prompting' phenomenon occur. More likely, the student may privately ask the teacher for clarification during a break. Most students simply move onto the next school task.

In a nutshell, students viewing a story done in SEE have to fight through the artificalness & English structure, in order to get at the story. Some may still not 'get it', get frustrated, or just give up on the particular story. In ASL, most students just enjoy the story as told, and are stimulated accordingly.

I'm in the camp where DHH students just get the vital information they need on critical areas such as History, Math, Sciences, etc. and get all the English they need in a regular English class and intensive English tutoring, and that's where SEE should be used, if at all.

Cousin Vinny

IMHO, the best way in achieving a high degree in English literacy is to read more. Yes, as funny as it sounds, in order to have a high degree in English ability, you need to be an excellent reader.

This should happen during elementary instruction. The DHH teacher should emphasize reading over auditory/verbal training, cursive writing, singing songs, and whatnot. Reading promotes vocabulary building, how to spot new words and derive definitions, to assimilate idioms and much more. High expectations and parential participation are essential ingredients from which a highly literate DHH person can spring forth.

Funny thing is, whenever I meet old friends from my FSD days, they always invariably remark how much time I've spent in the library, and now wished they did the same. And I would invariably wish I've spent more time participating in sports & activities, being more 'social', etc.! And we would laugh about it and move on.

loml

Eyeth,
Vocabulary excersises every night would definately benefit. You are pre-lingually deafened. What was the mode of communication that your family choose to use your in the home? What was the approach that your mother used for the vocabulary exercises?

My question here Eyeth, is what method were these people first taught with, in the home and in the school setting. Some children are not seeing ASL as they are mainstreamed, and do not have any involvement with ASL users. As far as dicourse with the teacher, imho, that should happen no matter what the communication method is. You mention the "arificialness" of SEE, I believe that this is a "coined phrase", by ASL users who are unhappy that ASL has been modified. I do not believe that a child who uses SEE/SEEII at home and in the educational setting would really care if it "artificial".


I am a firm believer in providing the language of instruction, whether it be English, Hebrew or Spanish. ASL does not do this nor does SEE. In Canada there are two official languages. Yes, there is "Canadian ASL and French LSQ". I personally have no experience with LSQ and cannot offer an opinion.
I do know that in Quebec there are deaf childre who cue French, who now must learn English, and the method of instruction is cueing. Cueing historically has lead to literacy and continues to do so today. To suggest a deaf child and their family "struggle" to communicate and learn language together, to me just doesnt make sense. jmho

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

deafdyke

vocab exercises help, but it's totally not the ONLY answer! Syntax and grammar are the real stumbling blocks.

Cousin Vinny

I would imagine, the standard auditory/verbal therapy regimen was used. My family did not know sign language.I see what you mean. Admittedly, my perceptions of SEE and its efficacy may have well been 'colored' by my ASL upbringing. Still, I find it hard to imagine how a long-time SEE user would be able to understand SEE instruction w/o any problems. I guess it's possible and SEE instruction would be 'natural' to SEE users. I would imagine, perhaps, that ASL instruction would invite more prompting and fatigue among SEE users as well!

That all said, I'm going to stick to my guns and prefer ASL on the side of the ASL v. SEE debate! Well, ASL is a language of its own right, and by trying to bend its grammatical rules and structure to another spoken language makes the resulting combination 'artificial'. Moreover, SEE is purely a creation of the school system and its professionals, made in response to a longstanding problem of English literacy among the DHH student population, lending credence to its 'artificialness'. Contrast that with ASL, a 'living' language, continually evolving, experiencing constant exposure to a wide variety of sources, and been in development since the early 1800's.

While I am not enamored by the creation of SEE and its 'polluting' of the ASL language in the name of English proficiency, I can live with it. I can converse with SEE users, and understand SEE signers with a minimum of difficulty. Now that I think of it, I surely hope the reverse is true, that long-time SEE users can understand me!I agree with you that communications between the family and the DHH child shouldn't be a 'struggle'. As for cueing, I'm going to shut my trap, as I dont' know well enough about it and its effectiveness.

Reba

True.

Reba

I'm curious about that, also.

My experience with "mainstream" education has been limited to one state, so I don't know how it is handled in other areas. What I have seen has disturbed me.

Except for pre-school "intervention" programs, deaf children in the public schools don't seem to get any further sign language training, whether it be ASL or SEE, nor do they get training in the correct way to use interpreters. When I was on a long-term sub assignment for a middle school terp, the other staff terp and I were discussing the daily and weekly class schedules. I asked the terp when did the students get their language training. I was informed that there was no such thing as formal classes for instruction in ASL grammar, sign vocabulary building, Deaf history and culture, or how to use assistive technology and interpreters. There were no opportunities to meet, much less associate with, Deaf adults. No "Deaf" related field trips, mentoring programs, clubs, etc. The few deaf classmates that they had were the only deaf people they knew.

In my work at the college, each time I meet a new Deaf student, one of the first questions is, "where are the Deaf people?" They want to know how to meet other Deaf young people. It's really sad that I know many more local Deaf people than any of them know. Also sad, most of the Deaf people I know who have any sort of community are older people.

I was taught that if I wanted to know a sign for something, I should ask the Deaf consumer for that sign. Sadly, many of the students entering college have very limited sign vocabularies. They are depending more on spelling but when I ask, "do you understand the meaning of that spelled word," I usually get a negative response.

It shocks me that they don't know the signs for common words and concepts. I'm not talking about technical or professional jargon. I talking about everyday terms.

Is it just my state?

Cousin Vinny

Thank you for sharing your anecdotal experiences from the 'other side of the fence', as an interpreter in a mainstreaming setting. I attended a Deaf institution for the vast majority of my school life, so my exposure to mainstreamed DHH programs has been very little. Your experiences have been quite illuminating, and depressing at the same time. There is a local DHH mainstream program. A few years ago, the H.S. hired a Deaf teacher, a Gally grad, to teach ASL to regular students as a foreign language. The DHH program, in recent memory, has never hired a Deaf person to teach DHH students, so this was an unusual move. (It didn't hurt that the ASL teacher was also an alumni of the high school in question.)

By the first week, the DHH students were flocking to the Deaf ASL teacher, and most of the regular students, sadly, couldn't be all that more interested in learning ASL. The interpreters at the mainstream program saw their DHH students' interest being heightened because they couldn't believe how 'ASL' the teacher was, and wanted to interact with him! The interpreters quote was 'The students' eyes opened wide and their mouths agape!'

The ASL teacher only lasted one year. A geniune shame, as he was truly a boon to the DHH population at the mainstreamed program there.One possible explanation would be that they were exposed to substandard sign language interpreters in their mainstream classes. Local public schools are notorious for hiring sign language interpreters straight from their ITP's! IMO, the very best and highly qualified ASL interpreters should be placed in elementary school settings.

Then, depending on local manpower and resources, the quality of such interpreting can be 'loosened' in later grades, as the student will have the mental acumen and tools needed to compensate for any variations or deficiencies in the interpreting.

Reba

That's how I felt, too.


Right. We need more teachers like that.


I suspect you are right about that. Sadly, many of the top-notch terps get frustrated trying to work within "the system", and don't stick around more than a couple years.

I do know a few good ones, and they also "moonlight" with community interpreting, which keeps them in touch with the adult Deaf community, and gives them variety in their assignments. It's the ones who believe that graduating from an ITP and working the school year is plenty enough that I worry about.

I notice that too many of the elementary school terps are treated more like "teacher aides", and begin to take on that mindset for themselves. Their job description includes bus driving, changing diapers, disciplining children, running errands, etc. They rarely attend interpreting or sign language professional workshops or in-house training. Sigh....