Bilingual Education is the Best Option

Jiro

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,284
Reaction score
142
Deaf children benefit from learning sign language, says research - Toronto Special Needs Kids | Examiner.com
Recent research into the language acquisition of deaf children has challenged some long-held beliefs by some medical personnel, educators, and professionals providing speech/language and other services for deaf people.

When parents first hear that their child has hearing loss, a doctor or audiologist may say, ”If you allow your child to sign, they won’t learn to speak” or “Teaching your child to sign and speak English the same time will confuse the child.”

What the experts say

Leading researchers and educators of the deaf such as Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C. and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID), a college at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York State say that there is no evidence for these claims and that sign language can actually enhance a deaf child’s acquisition of spoken language.

Recent research results

Researchers at La Trobe University in Australia studied deaf adults who learned to sign either at birth, between the ages of 2 to 8, or as a second language later in life. Their findings reported that children who learned sign at birth were more accurate in British Sign Language (BSL) and more successful in learning language than children who were exposed to sign later on.

"The advantages of early sign language exposure remain clear even with rapid advances in hearing aids and cochlear implants,” researcher Dr Adam Schembri, Director of the National Institute for Deaf Studies and Sign Language at La Trobe University said in a press release.

"Bilingual education is the best way of ensuring that deaf children have early exposure to both a signed language and a spoken/written language, which will provide the deaf child with the best chance for successful language acquisition, in either or both languages, Says Schembri. "We know that bilingualism comes with a range of cognitive benefits, so we would advocate early bilingualism in both signed and spoken language for all deaf children.”
Click to expand...
 
I have read this in many other places too. I am a firm believer in being bi- or multi-lingual. :ty: for sharing this article.
 
IMO -

oral-only is a bad option since it's a 50-50 risk.
ASL-only is a bad option since it's a 50-50 risk.
BiBi is a great option since it combines both options at once as above with much less risk in case one option failed.
 
Absolutely. And learning multiple languages opens possible opportunities later in life. Jobs as translators, foreign/domestic, government, etc. It's never too early to learn multiple languages, especially when they are key to communication for education.
 
Leading researchers and educators of the deaf such as Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C. and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID), a college at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York State say that there is no evidence for these claims and that sign language can actually enhance a deaf child’s acquisition of spoken language.
Click to expand...

Yet they showed the result:

Researchers at La Trobe University in Australia studied deaf adults who learned to sign either at birth, between the ages of 2 to 8, or as a second language later in life. Their findings reported that children who learned sign at birth were more accurate in British Sign Language (BSL) and more successful in learning language than children who were exposed to sign later on.
Click to expand...

Well, of course! It's no different from people know multiple languages in Europe...
 
Jiro said:
IMO -

oral-only is a bad option since it's a 50-50 risk.
ASL-only is a bad option since it's a 50-50 risk.
BiBi is a great option since it combines both options at once as above with much less risk in case one option failed.
Click to expand...

What I have been saying since I joined in 2006.
 
Jiro said:
IMO -

oral-only is a bad option since it's a 50-50 risk.
ASL-only is a bad option since it's a 50-50 risk.
BiBi is a great option since it combines both options at once as above with much less risk in case one option failed.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that ASL only is a bad option per se. ASL with good expressive written English can be a good option. But yes, the ideal should be both ASL, and written/spoken English. Spoken English should be a supplement and viewed as a good useful skill.
And yes, bi-bi rocks.
 
deafdyke said:
I wouldn't say that ASL only is a bad option per se. ASL with good expressive written English can be a good option. But yes, the ideal should be both ASL, and written/spoken English. Spoken English should be a supplement and viewed as a good useful skill.
And yes, bi-bi rocks.
Click to expand...

ASL would be useless if a deaf kid is not in a strong ASL environment.
 
not only 'languages' but actual educational contents needs to be strong as does the teachers will to TEACH but NOT patronise!!!
 
I support learning several languages. My daughter was fluent in English and Japanese before she started 1st Grade. She now speaks 7 (I think) languages. Certainly ASL would be a handy language for anyone to learn to, especially a deaf child.
 
That's awesome! I've always envied people that learned lots of languages.
 
954875_10151645340922173_2057032622_n.jpg
 
Being a BiBi is the best option for full access to the communication needs.
 
Jiro said:
ASL would be useless if a deaf kid is not in a strong ASL environment.
Click to expand...

ASL would had been no use to me as a child , there where no HOH students in my class room . I bet the kids that where deaf or hoh went to the school in Boston for Deaf and HOH. I only knew one other girl that was hoh and we did not like one another.
 
whatdidyousay! said:
ASL would had been no use to me as a child , there where no HOH students in my class room . I bet the kids that where deaf or hoh went to the school in Boston for Deaf and HOH. I only knew one other girl that was hoh and we did not like one another.
Click to expand...

It doesn't necessarily have to be about communicating with other students. ASL would come in handy for understanding your teachers because of an ASL interpreter.
 
AlleyCat said:
It doesn't necessarily have to be about communicating with other students. ASL would come in handy for understanding your teachers because of an ASL interpreter.
Click to expand...

Exactly, My friend is HOH but really wants a terp so she can understand 100%!
 
whatdidyousay! said:
ASL would had been no use to me as a child , there where no HOH students in my class room . I bet the kids that where deaf or hoh went to the school in Boston for Deaf and HOH. I only knew one other girl that was hoh and we did not like one another.
Click to expand...

It is all about language development as evidenced in the picture Jiro posted. Often times too many deaf children aren't allowed to have access to ASL and have limited access to spoken English due not being able to hear like hearing people and then end up with severe language delays or deficients. It is a risk that people who believe in the oral-only philosophy keep taking and it pisses me off!
 
shel90 said:
It is all about language development as evidenced in the picture Jiro posted. Often times too many deaf children aren't allowed to have access to ASL and have limited access to spoken English due not being able to hear like hearing people and then end up with severe language delays or deficients. It is a risk that people who believe in the oral-only philosophy keep taking and it pisses me off!
Click to expand...

I agree. But isn't that their choice to make?
 
Back
Top