Deaf Education - One size does not fit all

[jillio]

I can imagine that speech is equally important to many deaf people. If one have no other deaf friends, speech must be really important. You sure have a very valid point here, my reason for putting ASL over speech is of course due to my background and my current situation, and I understand you perfect, thanks for clarifying.

But I am not sure if TC will result in better speech than bi-bi, propably it's the opposite. Research are pointing in a direction where those best in speech and oral communication, are those who are most fluent in sign language. It's also interesting that hearing students have thrived and enjoyed bi-bi programs for deaf. Speech is part of all bi-bi programs, but one can get thru them without speech skills. I have been told that 10 percent of the whole population can't lipread, high or low IQ. Wouldn't it be risky to find out who lacks this skill after a couple of years in a TC program?

To me, TC are more widespread because it's less accurate, anything goes, and it's easier to employ people that fit, as one don't have to know ASL. Parents often also feels the promises of TC is more concurrent with their worries and hopes than bi-bi. But that's just my impression.

TC is yet anpother outgrowth of the oral philosophy. It does not result in better speech skills, not in increased profieciency in English or sign because when manually coded English is used (as in the case of sim-com) the child is not being exposed to accurate models of any language, and it results in decreased fluency in both sign and speech. As a consequence, we end up with students that know something of both languages, but never develop native fluency in either.

 

[shel90]

TC generally uses sim-com. That provides a confusing linguistic environment for the child. They end up getting less than effective models for both sign and English.

That is what I saw in all the TC programs I have observed. Most of the kids were not reading beyond 1st grade levels even though some of them were in 8th grade.

 

[shel90]

Exposing to all methods does not necessarily exposing to all methods simultaneously. It is not an extra load cognitively if they are not exposed simultaneously. Imagine 2 teachers in front of a hearing class room teaching algebra and history at exactly the same time. Would you come away with sufficient understanding of either? Of course not. It requires a form of splint attention of which people simply are not capable cognitively. One cannot give full attention to 2 things that require that degree of concentration at once. Think of it this way: When you are driving in a familiar area, it is easy to carry on a conversation with a passenger and navigate your car through the roads at the same time. But if you are in an area of heavy traffic, unfamiliar with the area, and looking for a specific address, you cannot continue to carry on a conversation and drive at the same time. You will stop talking, and use your cognitive powers to accomplish the task of negotiating the heavy traffic and looking for the address you need. Once the traffic thins out, and you are back in familiar territory, you can resume your talking and driving at the same time. It is the same thing in a classroom. If we expect children to learn well, we cannot place them in a situation that creates a cognitiveoverload, and expect them to give full attention to 2 tasks that require split attention.

Exactly..it is not only the students who get confused, the teachers too if they have to switch from one language to another or use both at the same time in the same lesson. We, teachers, need our full cognitive processing to be able to manage a classroom full of kids, effectively teach the lesson, and keep the students on task. It takes a lot of mental work but because I use one language, my focus is not on how to use two languages at once. As a result, I am able to teach the lessons in a more effective approach that meets the diverse learning needs of my students. Yes, even with ASL, my students have different learning styles.

 

[shel90]

Deaf children do not need to hear with their ears to be taught speech. You should know that we rely more on our vision in a sense we hear with our eyes. There is a mirror in speech therapy where deaf children can look at themselves to pronounce words and the sounds of each begin letter of a word. They are capable to understand speech by placing a hand to their throat and their mouth and the speech therapist's mouth and throat too.

Yes it is gonna get very difficult to learn but they can do it all they have to do is try harder.

Thanks Cheri but I already know that. I was being scarcastic when I made that comment. I had the exact same experience with speech therapy so did my brother and thousands of other deafies. Some are able to develop good speech skills while others werent able to. My point was that despite having good speech, the deaf child is still deaf and doesnt have full access to spoken language so why use a language in the classroom that they may understnad half of the time if they are lucky? That's why we have speech classes for spoken language instruction along with the training of speech skills. Our students who go to those classes enjoy them so what's the harm here? Nobody is complaining as far as I know..the parents are happy, the kids are happy, and the teachers are happy.

 

[shel90]

I agree that it beats oralism or ASL by themselves. And for communication purposes, TC works better in day-to-day communications than it does in the classroom. When one is communicating in a less formal environment than the classroom, one can always stop and say, "I didn't understand that. Could you please repeat?" But in a classroom, where instruction is not so dyadic, it isn't quite as effective. If I had to choose between oral only, ASL only, and TC, I would definately choose TC. But all of these methods have some serious downsides. That is why I support Bi-Bi. The purpose of Bi-Bi is not just to provide a Deaf Cultural affiliation for children, which I do think is important and leads to more than pride in being deaf, but also addresses some very real social and psychological developmental needs that everyone has, but also to provide them with an atmosphere in which they learn to complete languages. That has been proven to be an advantage cognitively for all people, deaf or hearing.

Day to day communication and a formal classroom communication are two totally different methods of communication. The classroom communication requires more critical thinking, abstract, and problem solving skills from the kids. One needs to have their full focus on that rather than trying to make sense of what is being said.

 

[Cheri]

TC is yet anpother outgrowth of the oral philosophy. It does not result in better speech skills

How can you say that about TC? If you really knew me, you would think twice for making a statement like that. Now I know how hearing parents must felt when they tried to tell some of you how their child does with what method they had chosen you find every flaws in that method. I just wanted all hearing parents to learn signs too with their deaf child, I don't care if they choose oral, I know how hard it is to learn to speak lip reading, but oral does help them with good speech and good lip reader, only a little problem they will have some diffculities.

What method won't have that diffculities?

Flip- You gonna be kidding me when you say that those who prefer speech don't have any deaf friends what do you know? I have friends who are both deaf amd hearing. I'm not one of those deaf people who sticks in their little world who referred themselves "a big D Deaf" who thinks signs should be the primary language for the deaf ONLY. And disrinct themselves from the hearing community if this is how it is here, then I'm in the wrong forum. I've met some deaf people like that in every walk of life and I sure do not want to be around those people who are not very accepting and so self center.

 

[Cheri]

Either this is not etched in stone, or some schools make adjustments, or as I said earlier not all TC programs are created equal. The reason I say that is only because of what I have seen in the case of my son. Granted that is a very limited view.

Yea did you read the line where it says 'some feels that the problem with TC is that the effort to sign and speak at the same time result in poor quality of sign language' it doesn't mean its true it just an expression of their feelings on how some view TC program.

 

[Cheri]

It never comes to amazing me on how some of you get upset with some hearing parents of deaf children who had chosen one approach (oral) and that they are limiting deaf children access for all tools, isn't this what some of you are doing? You think speech is just a bonus well some hearing parents thinks sign language to them is just a bonus. You are no better than them. I'm so lost with words, I supposed I'm the only one who believes that all deaf children should learn both signs and speech, everything as possible, while some of you want to limited their rights. How sad.

 

[shel90]

Exactly....used as a safety net for students who cannot acquire oral skills. Don't you see the difference therefore, between a true Bi-Bi atmosphere and a TC educational philosophy? Well, we'll try this, and if it doesn't work, we'll try that, and then maybe throw some of this in there, and then some of that. In the meantime, precious time is being wasted while we experiment with deaf children's education. And, again, according to your definition as supplied by the article, it is manual English, not sign that is employed. Therefore, it is instruction in an orally based language only, even if it is in a visual mode.

And it is those kinds of practices of "let's try this" ...no no..."Let's try this" that has many of our students coming to our program late with severe language delays. Those who have started with our program since infants dont have language delays and many of them also have speech skills to communicate with hearing people.

 

[shel90]

No, that isn't what I am saying at all. I am saying that a child needs to have adequate language exposure to a language that is readily acquired, and therefore, allows them to develop the cognitive processes that are dependednt upon language. In that way, they have been habilitated to use language as a skill. They are capable of using language as a thought process, not just a means of verbal communication. Once that has been accomplihed, they can be rehabilitated to transfer those skills to speech.

Didnt Helen Heller build her strong L1 language through sign language and then work on developing speech skills later?

 

[shel90]

TC is yet anpother outgrowth of the oral philosophy. It does not result in better speech skills, not in increased profieciency in English or sign because when manually coded English is used (as in the case of sim-com) the child is not being exposed to accurate models of any language, and it results in decreased fluency in both sign and speech. As a consequence, we end up with students that know something of both languages, but never develop native fluency in either.

and by not having a strong foundation of language in either one, developing literacy skills becomes more difficult for them.

 

[shel90]

It never comes to amazing me on how some of you get upset with some hearing parents of deaf children who had chosen one approach (oral) and that they are limiting deaf children access for all tools, isn't this what some of you are doing? You think speech is just a bonus well some hearing parents thinks sign language to them is just a bonus. You are no better than them. I'm so lost with words, I supposed I'm the only one who believes that all deaf children should learn both signs and speech, everything as possible, while some of you want to limited their rights. How sad.

U are saying speech as in the deaf child learning how to speak? If so, there is nothing wrong with that. What we are talking about is the deaf child being taught lesson by the teachers using speech. That is a different skill and different situation.

Have u had any experience working in different Deaf ed programs as a volunteer, as a teacher or as an aide?

 

[shel90]

How can you say that about TC? If you really knew me, you would think twice for making a statement like that. Now I know how hearing parents must felt when they tried to tell some of you how their child does with what method they had chosen you find every flaws in that method. I just wanted all hearing parents to learn signs too with their deaf child, I don't care if they choose oral, I know how hard it is to learn to speak lip reading, but oral does help them with good speech and good lip reader, only a little problem they will have some diffculities.

What method won't have that diffculities?

.

Cheri...oral deaf education resulted in my good speech and lipreading skills but I wouldnt want that for deaf/hoh children cuz of the language being used not being fully accessible for all deaf/hoh children. I openly accept its flaws even though I was raised with that approach.

Why should any child get partial access to the subjects being taught? That is like forcing blind people to read from books without brialle. It just doesnt make sense to do that in the educational setting where learning is critical. I dont get that some of you think that is ok to have some difficulties in the educational setting. Why is that ok?

Tell me, how can a teacher use SEE, ASL, spoken English, gestures all in one lesson for a classroom full of kids and expect all kids to understand him/her? In an one-on-one situation, that can work but doing that to a classroom of about 10 or so kids in one lesson? I would go crazy myself trying to organize my thoughts using all these different languages or methods.

 

[Cheri]

I did not say to teach speech and use signs in the classroom, they do not have to understand the speech, but I don't see how a teacher cannot speak and sign the same time so that the students if they want to read the teacher's lips and signs the same time for all that means they may. I don't know how many hours of speech therapy do the deaf children have and how many times a week? You never gave me an answer on that one.

Helen Keller was deaf and blind she was taught speech and signs and she can't see or hear but she did a remarkable job and I was impressed, those deaf children have their eyes but they can't hear what excuse is that for not being able to be taught speech. It is going to get hard before it gets better. Its the same as when a deaf person is taught signs for the first time.

 

[shel90]

I did not say to teach speech and use signs in the classroom, they do not have to understand the speech, but I don't see how a teacher cannot speak and sign the same time so that the students if they want to read the teacher's lips and signs the same time for all that means they may. I don't know how many hours of speech therapy do the deaf children have and how many times a week? You never gave me an answer on that one.

Helen Keller was deaf and blind she was taught speech and signs and she can't see or hear but she did a remarkable job and I was impressed, those deaf children have their eyes but they can't hear what excuse is that for not being able to be taught speech. It is going to get hard before it gets better. Its the same as when a deaf person is taught signs for the first time.

You have to remember that Helen Keller had a full-time teacher living with her daily. That is a different situation since in today's time that is almost unheard of. The question is...wasnt she taught signing first and when she finally had a language, she was taught speech later? If that 's the case, then that called establishing a strong L1 foundation in a language that is fully accessible to her (which was sign language) and then transfering that foundation to develop a 2nd language which was speech/reading/writing. Nothing wrong with that. If she was taught both at the same time then it worked for her.

Now, I am going to use my brother as an example cuz he is a perfect example of how some deaf people are just unable to develop speech or lipreading skills no matter how intensively trained they are. He was in an oral-only program for 5 years after his deafness was diagnosis at birth. It was a complete failure for him..he didnt even develop any kind of speech skills. We dont know why...the point is there are many deaf children out there that just are unable to do it.

In our program, the young deaf children recieve 30 mins of speech therapy 5 days a week along with ASL being used for language development. As they get older, some show signs of being able to benefit from it and others dont show signs. We can make recommendations but the parents have the last say to how often their child can recieve speech therapy. The parents can take our reccomendations to make their decisions or make them on their own. We dont force speech on children who show signs of no benefit so we use the extra time towards developing higher critical thinking skills and so on.

As for speaking and signing the same time, that is using both languages at the same time and like Jillo says..one language or even both languages end up being compromised so the children end up with broken English or broken ASL. Hearing children arent being instructed by a teacher using Spanish and English at the same time, arent they? That would be too confusing for them and even more for the teacher who needs a clear state of mind to effectively carry out the lessons to fit all the diverse learning needs for all of the children.

Teaching is just not easy with using one language...I cant imagine teaching a quality lesson using speech and signed English...my mind would get all jumbled up. That is not my goal as a teacher...speech skills. My goal is to have the children develop strong literacy skills. The speech skills development is the responsiblity of the speech dept. A teacher assuming the responsibility of both is taking on too much and usually ends up teaching a poor quality lesson to the children. I have seen that in so many programs.

If TC was going to be used, it is best for one-on-one or two-on-one situations.

 

[jillio]

How can you say that about TC? If you really knew me, you would think twice for making a statement like that. Now I know how hearing parents must felt when they tried to tell some of you how their child does with what method they had chosen you find every flaws in that method. I just wanted all hearing parents to learn signs too with their deaf child, I don't care if they choose oral, I know how hard it is to learn to speak lip reading, but oral does help them with good speech and good lip reader, only a little problem they will have some diffculities.

What method won't have that diffculities?

Flip- You gonna be kidding me when you say that those who prefer speech don't have any deaf friends what do you know? I have friends who are both deaf amd hearing. I'm not one of those deaf people who sticks in their little world who referred themselves "a big D Deaf" who thinks signs should be the primary language for the deaf ONLY. And disrinct themselves from the hearing community if this is how it is here, then I'm in the wrong forum. I've met some deaf people like that in every walk of life and I sure do not want to be around those people who are not very accepting and so self center.

Cheri, I was not talking about you personally, or any other deaf person specifically. I was talking about a philosophy. If a deaf person is capable ofdeveloping speech skills, they will most certainly do so in a TC environment. But if they are not able to develop speech skills, the TC environment will not change that fact. So TC, in and of itself, as a methodology, is not responsible for improved speech skills. Just as an oral environment will not help a deaf child that is unable to develop speech skills learn to speak. And you said yourself that deaf individuals use their vision to uinderstand speech. Bi-Bi capitalizes on that and gives them language in a completely visual mode as L1 langauge, and spoken language with visual cues as L2 langauge. It lets a deaf child use their strengths.

 

[jillio]

I did not say to teach speech and use signs in the classroom, they do not have to understand the speech, but I don't see how a teacher cannot speak and sign the same time so that the students if they want to read the teacher's lips and signs the same time for all that means they may. I don't know how many hours of speech therapy do the deaf children have and how many times a week? You never gave me an answer on that one.

Helen Keller was deaf and blind she was taught speech and signs and she can't see or hear but she did a remarkable job and I was impressed, those deaf children have their eyes but they can't hear what excuse is that for not being able to be taught speech. It is going to get hard before it gets better. Its the same as when a deaf person is taught signs for the first time.

Helen Keller was also the daughter of a very wealthy family who was able to provide her private tutors. She was not educated in a classroom where the teacher is responsible for many children. And, if you have watched anyold vidoes of Ms. Keller speaking as an adult, you will learn that her speech was very much unintelligible. She normally only made an opening comment or two when making a speach, with the rest being delivered by her interpreter.

Helen Keller was an amazing individual, and she certainly deserves everyone's admiration for her courage and perserverence, but we can't use her as a comparison for the education of deaf students as a group.

 

[shel90]

Helen Keller was also the daughter of a very wealthy family who was able to provide her private tutors. She was not educated in a classroom where the teacher is responsible for many children. And, if you have watched anyold vidoes of Ms. Keller speaking as an adult, you will learn that her speech was very much unintelligible. She normally only made an opening comment or two when making a speach, with the rest being delivered by her interpreter.

Helen Keller was an amazing individual, and she certainly deserves everyone's admiration for her courage and perserverence, but we can't use her as a comparison for the education of deaf students as a group.

Exaclty...if all deaf children recieved a full time teacher in their homes, maybe all of them would develop speech skills but even that, I doubt it cuz some just dont have the innate capabilities to do so.

My question is, if some deaf people are unable to develop speech skills, is it the end of the world? I see so many of my deaf friends, coworkersand brother who have absulotely no speech skills and they are leading happy and productive lives. Why are they able to do so? They have strong literacy skills.

 

[Buffalo]

We don't split them up in groups..the kids have speech classes for spoken language instruction but all of them are together for the important subjects like math, LA, social studies, and science and ASL is the language used.
........
If we r going to have our students be taught with the same curriulm as the public school kids are taught with, then we have to stick with one language while teaching otherwise, we wouldn't get anything taught. Then the students will fall further behind...I won't put their education at risk for the sake of being able to communicate with hearing people. Education comes first.
[\QUOTE]

There is an education that one size does fit. Bi-Bi method! There is a common language denomination among the deaf - they all can sign. Some of the deaf kids can lipread. Some of the deaf kids can speak. All of them can sign so let's scrap the AGBell philosphy and get on with Bi-Bi method. AGBell has 100 years to prove themselves that oral method works and it flunk miserably. Oral method is not the one size fit for all. TC method is so-so so I am all for Bi-Bi method.

By the way, Shel90, what does the other kids do while some of the kids have speech therapy??

I am on the same wavelength as Shel90 and Jillio - Education comes first! The kids need a strong L1 to get a good english skill. I personally had speech therapy in both oral setting and ASL setting. I understand more in the ASL setting than the oral setting.

 

[Silentwolfdog]

The world will always move on whether deaf person can speak or not. Stop thinking about what other people will treat deaf person just because of their incapable to speak, but instead give deaf person the strength and courage to face with any hardships the world will strike them with. That method is the best defense deaf person can have.

Capable to speak is just one of tool, but not a weapon deaf person can use to survive. Speaking is worth nothing if deaf person have a low self-esteem.

Rather than worrying about getting deaf person to "fit" in with the rest of the world, worry about deaf person's happiness and being comfortable.

Hearing people have ability to adapt to any changes that was present in front of them. Some of them just chose not to.

Sure it's good to give deaf child all options available out there, but just make sure it's not because of what other people are doing.

Don't force kid to use fork if 90% of the society use fork to eat. If you just ended up become one of 1% that use chopstick and yet you are happy. Deal with it.
Life goes on whether you can follow the society or not.
Sometimes 1% offers the best gift you can ever had.

Person does not miss out much if he can't understand what's going with the rest of the world.

Love, friendship, family, and hope always find another way into that person's life.

So don't force kid to learn sign language or to speak just because you think it's best for kid. Just offer it, kid will pick whether make kid most at ease.