Deaf Education - One size does not fit all

[loml]

I am not talking about speech here.

I respectfully disagree, It isn't about the family, it's about the deaf child. Tell me why a deaf child is forced to learn the family's language? This is a very difficult task. It's like telling a handicapped child to walk because the whole family walks. They should find a better and more effective way to communicate even if the hearing parents/family have to learn a whole new language. The difference between a hearing and a deaf child is that spoken and signed languages use dfferent modalities. In the case of the hearing children, they use their hearing mode. In the case of deaf children, they use the visual or seeing mode. So, You cannot expect a deaf child to learn the family's language. It sounds unfair in my opinion.

Cheri- I can see what you are saying, if you are referring to acquiring/learning language through speech only. However, learning the language of your family for a deaf child, imo, is no harder than learning a form of sign (language). I am a cuer of English. I found cueing through my personal experience with the Deaf community, deaf education system, interpreter programs, rehabilitation institutions and the medical system. Cued Speech can/does give a deaf child from a hearing family access to their families language. Myself, I consider this a fabulous gift of early intervention. It is a visual form of, it is kenesthetic and can be auditory, of course depending on the level of hearing loss. As with ASL from a fluent deaf signer, the child can/does recieve and aquire/learn their families language from people who are fluent in that language.

As with any successful aquisition of language, there must be consistency, accuracy and dedication.

 

[jillio]

I respectfully disagree, It isn't about the family, it's about the deaf child. Tell me why a deaf child is forced to learn the family's language? This is a very difficult task. It's like telling a handicapped child to walk because the whole family walks. They should find a better and more effective way to communicate even if the hearing parents/family have to learn a whole new language. The difference between a hearing and a deaf child is that spoken and signed languages use dfferent modalities. In the case of the hearing children, they use their hearing mode. In the case of deaf children, they use the visual or seeing mode. So, You cannot expect a deaf child to learn the family's language. It sounds unfair in my opinion.

To ask the child to do what is necessary to compensate is to put the child in the role of the adult. It is the parents who are the adults. Act like it. Take responsibility for responding to your child's needs. DO NOT EXPECT YOUR CHILD TO FULFILL YOUR NEEDS.

 

[jillio]

Cheri- I can see what you are saying, if you are referring to acquiring/learning language through speech only. However, learning the language of your family for a deaf child, imo, is no harder than learning a form of sign (language). I am a cuer of English. I found cueing through my personal experience with the Deaf community, deaf education system, interpreter programs, rehabilitation institutions and the medical system. Cued Speech can/does give a deaf child from a hearing family access to their families language. Myself, I consider this a fabulous gift of early intervention. It is a visual form of, it is kenesthetic and can be auditory, of course depending on the level of hearing loss. As with ASL from a fluent deaf signer, the child can/does recieve and aquire/learn their families language from people who are fluent in that language.

As with any successful aquisition of language, there must be consistency, accuracy and dedication.

You still seem to be confused regarding the difference between acquisition and learning. The very fact that you refer to having "found" cuing is testiment to the fact that it was not a process of aqcquisition, but of learning. While it is possible that CS could be a useful tool for teaching English, it has yet to be supported as a method for acquiring an L1 language.

 

[shel90]

I respectfully disagree, It isn't about the family, it's about the deaf child. Tell me why a deaf child is forced to learn the family's language? This is a very difficult task. It's like telling a handicapped child to walk because the whole family walks. They should find a better and more effective way to communicate even if the hearing parents/family have to learn a whole new language. The difference between a hearing and a deaf child is that spoken and signed languages use dfferent modalities. In the case of the hearing children, they use their hearing mode. In the case of deaf children, they use the visual or seeing mode. So, You cannot expect a deaf child to learn the family's language. It sounds unfair in my opinion.

I agree with u there.

 

[loml]

To ask the child to do what is necessary to compensate is to put the child in the role of the adult. It is the parents who are the adults. Act like it. Take responsibility for responding to your child's needs. DO NOT EXPECT YOUR CHILD TO FULFILL YOUR NEEDS.

Jillio - Cued Speech can/does meet the needs of a deaf child in a hearing family with the language of their own family.

Suggesting that the families who choose this method are not meeting their deaf child needs and are expecting the child to fulfiill their families needs, is simply ignorance on your part.

 

[jillio]

Jillio - Cued Speech can/does meet the needs of a deaf child in a hearing family with the language of their own family.

Suggesting that the families who choose this method are not meeting their deaf child needs and are expecting the child to fulfiill their families needs, is simply ignorance on your part.

That is what you continue to claim, loml, but you fail to support it with anything but your own opinion. And, when the family expects a deaf child to meet their needs for oral communication, they are ignoring the deaf child's needs, developmentally, linguistically, psychologically, and educationally. That, my friend, can be supported with empirical evidence, not opinion.

 

[loml]

Dark in there?

You still seem to be confused regarding the difference between acquisition and learning. The very fact that you refer to having "found" cuing is testiment to the fact that it was not a process of aqcquisition, but of learning. While it is possible that CS could be a useful tool for teaching English, it has yet to be supported as a method for acquiring an L1 language.

You still seem to be confused as to what Cued Speech is and does.

It is spelled cueing.

 

[loml]

That is what you continue to claim, loml, but you fail to support it with anything but your own opinion. And, when the family expects a deaf child to meet their needs for oral communication, they are ignoring the deaf child's needs, developmentally, linguistically, psychologically, and educationally. That, my friend, can be supported with empirical evidence, not opinion.

Do not confuse my posting regarding Cued Speech with that of oral only edcuation jillio.

 

[jillio]

Do not confuse my posting regarding Cued Speech with that of oral only edcuation jillio.

I do not confuse it at all, loml. CS is a moderated form of oralism, as it is based on an oral language. Just because someone made up a few handshapes to supplement oral English, doesn't mean it has been transformed into something less oral.

 

[Cheri]

Do not confuse my posting regarding Cued Speech with that of oral only edcuation jillio.

Cued Speech method is an oral approach, I'm sorry you may disagree with me, I've took it, only that it added eight hand shapes signs. Cued Speech is based on phonetic sounds and it can be used in every language.

 

[jillio]

Cued Speech method is an oral approach, I'm sorry you may disagree with me, I've took it and it is an oral approach method, only that it added eight hand shapes signs. Cued Speech is based on phonetic sounds and it can be used in every language.

Thank you, Cheri.

 

[Cheri]

I do not confuse it at all, loml. CS is a moderated form of oralism, as it is based on an oral language. Just because someone made up a few handshapes to supplement oral English, doesn't mean it has been transformed into something less oral.

Yep, Jillio you're very right.

 

[jillio]

Yep, Jillio you're very right.

again!

 

[Cheri]

You're welcome, Jillio.

 

[loml]

Cued Speech method is an oral approach, I'm sorry you may disagree with me, I've took it, only that it added eight hand shapes signs. Cued Speech is based on phonetic sounds and it can be used in every language.

Cheri- I understand that when you took Cued Speech it was used with an oral approach. This does not mean that Cued Speech is an oral only system.

 

[loml]

Your bias is showing again........

I do not confuse it at all, loml. CS is a moderated form of oralism, as it is based on an oral language. Just because someone made up a few handshapes to supplement oral English, doesn't mean it has been transformed into something less oral.

jillio - Yes you do, but then again that is nothing new. Have some speech therapist supplemented their programs with Cued Speech. Yes, some have. This does not detract from the orginal intent of the system, in fact it shows the diversity of Dr. Cornetts' system. In fact using Cued Speech in conjunction with speech therapy removes the ambiguity of speech reading. This is not a negative.

 

[jillio]

jillio - Yes you do, but then again that is nothing new. Have some speech therapist supplemented their programs with Cued Speech. Yes, some have. This does not detract from the orginal intent of the system, in fact it shows the diversity of Dr. Cornetts' system. In fact using Cued Speech in conjunction with speech therapy removes the ambiguity of speech reading. This is not a negative.

Cued Speech is intended to cue spoken language. Spoken language is oral language. How much plainer does it have to get for you to comprehend? You sure as heck don't use it to due ASL, now, do you? Who said it was a negative? I said it was an oral method. Negative is your word, which would make your posts very contradictory, indeed.

 

[loml]

Cued Speech is intended to cue spoken language. Spoken language is oral language. How much plainer does it have to get for you to comprehend? You sure as heck don't use it to due ASL, now, do you? Who said it was a negative? I said it was an oral method. Negative is your word, which would make your posts very contradictory, indeed.

jillio - I am not the one confused with what the system of Cued Speech is and does. I never said CS was negative jillio. Good to see that your biased comprehension of my posts regarding Cued Speech continue to meet your needs.

 

[jillio]

jillio - I am not the one confused with what the system of Cued Speech is and does. I never said CS was negative jillio. Good to see that your biased comprehension of my posts regarding Cued Speech continue to meet your needs.

Once again, loml, you need to read carefully. I said you brought the word negative into the discussion. My needs are not the issue, loml. The needs of deaf children are the issue. And we are all well aware of what CS is and what it does. It is an invented system (by a mathemetician), that uses handshapes to cue the phonemes of spoken language . What it does is remove the ambiguity from speech reading. It is an artificially designed representation of spoken language. You can try to twist it around any way you want to, but you can't get past the fact that it is an oral method.

BTW, loml, The War of the Worlds movie based on the original radio broadcast is on T.V.tonight. You might want to take a gander at it.

 

[Cheri]

Cheri- I understand that when you took Cued Speech it was used with an oral approach. This does not mean that Cued Speech is an oral only system.

I did not say that, show me where I mention "only".