I still don't get what you're arguing. Why do you think that being pro full communication toolbox, is being biased? You're looking at this from a Brit perspective....(and I know a lot about that b/c my friend is kinda brainwashed on Brit oralism) Just b/c you can hear and speak realaitvely well, it's not gonna mean that that particualr tool is gonna be useful for ALL sittuions. I just think that parents should choose which language should be a dhh kid's first language, and then stop parental involvement there. The job of a parent should be to equipt dhh kids will all the possible tools!
Pros and cons of Oralism??
- Thread starter ThreeLittleBear
- Start date
deafdyke said:
If a parent chooses sign or orals, someone here would still raise issue ! Parents cannot really 'choose' what a child will rely on, ability dictates that, you can lead a horse to water etc. We seem to agree whatever works is best. I detected (Perhaps inaccurately ?), you are not fond of oral means of communication, If I assumed bias I apologise of course. Don't know about brit oralism, but it is true the sign user in the UK is no longer having it all their own way, (They're really quiet these days), culture now has to be justified a lot more here, and more clearly identified too, and more deaf each day are accepting if a deaf person signs or NOT, then that is fine, only the deaf sign purirsts are annoyed, but still not saying much. Our youth are more educated and more open-minded than they used to be, and no longer have time for the, d,D 'wars' and so say all of us. This is clearly, down to fewer deaf schools and more inclusion in mainstream. Gallaudet semed to ram home the worry deaf concentrations encourage the extremist deaf. The end justifies the means, our deaf are benefitting from this inclusion, despite the grumbling, culture is losing ground as a result, it's progress. Personally I never saw much of a case for the identity thing, it is and always was, about effective communications to me. Should we sacrifice a cultural identity for wider access to the world ? I think in the UK that question is already being answered. Many no longer see, a greater cohesion and deaf community is necessary. In the past maybe.
Ahhhhh, here's where we got mixed up. Yeah, I know that the parents can't choose what a kid will rely on......that's why I am pro-full communication toolbox. Like there are a lot of parents out there who think that one way is enough or sufficent. We gotta encourage hearing parents to keep a very open mind when it comes to filling up their kid's communication toolbox.Like we should tell them that it's OK for them to pick their kids' first language,(even if it's ORAL!) but they should also not fall into the trap that one methodolgy is enough for a lifetime. We should also encourage them to start exposure to the other methodologies early on, rather then having to wait for their kids to discover a particular methodolgy on their own. I really do think that by approaching it that way, a lot of the oral vs ASL debate will die down. I see too many pro oralists pushing oral-only as this wonderful glorious Utopia, where dhh kids will magically fit in 100% into the hearing world. B/c of this mentality, there have been some oralists who really look down on ASL and Deaf culture. If we can change that attidue then maybe, just maybe the tension and debate will die down and be limited to the hardcore types.
The debate is mainly between oral or signing deaf not deaf people and hearing, a lot of people miss this point. Mostly it is because of bad responses reactions between these two deaf sectors, who find a level of intolerance towards each other because of modes used. One advocates a system some deaf see as repressive (Oralism), another sector sees the sign/culture as oppressive, and sometimes elitist.
Neither sector is going to 'win' any argument, what they can do is agree to differ and respect the mode whatever form it comes in, and perhaps all sectors lower barriers to alternatives, so communication get better. If hearing learn a foreign language, that is a feather in their cap, and a means for different people to communicate to each other, it doesn't affect their home language. Both oralist and signing sectors have a lot to offer each other, but so much energy and progress is being wasted fighting each other, then, blaming HEARING. There is a reluctance to admit, most issues are being honed among ourselves, and not just by hearing people.
Neither sector is going to 'win' any argument, what they can do is agree to differ and respect the mode whatever form it comes in, and perhaps all sectors lower barriers to alternatives, so communication get better. If hearing learn a foreign language, that is a feather in their cap, and a means for different people to communicate to each other, it doesn't affect their home language. Both oralist and signing sectors have a lot to offer each other, but so much energy and progress is being wasted fighting each other, then, blaming HEARING. There is a reluctance to admit, most issues are being honed among ourselves, and not just by hearing people.
Actually Pascifist, the debate IS about hearing vs deaf. How many dhh kids would have grown up purely oral without the direct influence of the hearing world? Actually wait.....it's not about hearing vs deaf......it's more about audism (the dhh people who have bought into the myth that speech and hearing is all it takes to assilmalate into the hearing world, and who insist that oral speech is sufficent for all situtions) and the full toolboxers.
You also miss the fact that nobody can be totally unbiased as to communication styles. However those of us who HAVE gone through the communication methodolgies can give better advice then experts, who might have an even stronger bias.
You also miss the fact that nobody can be totally unbiased as to communication styles. However those of us who HAVE gone through the communication methodolgies can give better advice then experts, who might have an even stronger bias.
Passicifist, the thing is that experts and doctors can only present theories...We can give a better view on the outcome of those theories b/c we experianced them growing up. Like a lot of experts and doctors may not totally know of downsides. Like for example, when's the last time you heard an expert acknowledge that there's a high rate of envioromentally caused mental illnesses in oral-only kids?
We have our biases yes, but since we are the ones that the theories were practiced on, I think we have a right to tell our side of the story. Hey, maybe this way one less dhh kid will grow up without all the emoitonal issues that I did....got teased about my voice, never felt like I totally fit in and so on and so on. The only way to get rid of the tension between the Deaf and Oral deaf people, is to acknowledge that the gross majority of dhh kids have the right to be bilingal and to parcipate in both worlds.
We have our biases yes, but since we are the ones that the theories were practiced on, I think we have a right to tell our side of the story. Hey, maybe this way one less dhh kid will grow up without all the emoitonal issues that I did....got teased about my voice, never felt like I totally fit in and so on and so on. The only way to get rid of the tension between the Deaf and Oral deaf people, is to acknowledge that the gross majority of dhh kids have the right to be bilingal and to parcipate in both worlds.
deafdyke said:
But it is a PERSONAL view, and may well not be applicable to someone else's child. Also, teaching method has changed, we are all, only 'experts' on our own issue, we can't be experts on anyone else's, any deaf adult will tell us all to butt out too E.G we could say 'when I was at a deaf school..... this happened," and may well be met with "But there AREN'T any deaf schools now, it's all mainstreaming," your view is immediately redundant. You can't be an expert having not done what they will have to do, and in a different way. You are deaf, but that is all you have in common. I would not react to a deaf education (Or lack of it), they way you do. each much find their own way.
Isabel79Hearing
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2006
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
When I was around 21 I worked in a school where the daughter of the lady who used to teach the class with me was deaf. When I met the girl (who was around 16 yrs old) I was impressed that she could lip rid everything that I said...and she could speak too. She attended a hearing school and knew no signs at all.
I dont know if I have a right to say anything as I am a hearing person, but I believe that she was missing loads for not learning how to sign...her own community and people just like her! Who could understand her and talk to her in a way that no others could!
Since I started to learn ASL by myself I fell in love even more with the language that I always had an interest on.
I don't agree on parents that force their deaf children to adapt to the hearing world only without giving them the chance to have their own world too.
Isabel
I dont know if I have a right to say anything as I am a hearing person, but I believe that she was missing loads for not learning how to sign...her own community and people just like her! Who could understand her and talk to her in a way that no others could!
Since I started to learn ASL by myself I fell in love even more with the language that I always had an interest on.
I don't agree on parents that force their deaf children to adapt to the hearing world only without giving them the chance to have their own world too.
Isabel
Agreed, it is a personal view, but my experiance growing up in the '80's and '90's, still has a lot of impact even today. I interact with many many dhh kids, and other kids with disabilites, as well as their parents, and trust me.....a lot of their stories about mainstreaming etc could be about my experiance growing up in the mainstream as an oral kid. Yes, everyone is an indivdual......that is why I always advise parents to experiment and find the best fit for them. They shouldn't just go with the default.....Parents are really pushed towards mainstreaming (what I mean by mainstreaming is regular classes with minimal accomondations such as a notetaker or 'terp)
and trust me....it is very difficult to get appropreaite accomondations in the mainstream. Some mainstream schools might be halfway decent, but a lot of them *shakes head sadly* All I'm saying is that parents really really need to be openminded and to experiment with both communication and schooling!
I was speaking from an UK viewpoint, there are 31 here in the UK that's all, my region (Wales), has none. Of that 31 8 are ear(!) - marked for closure, and 4 on the line. Clearly the UK believes mainstream works. Unless the more able deaf children enter mainstream, then the system will not apply the approriate support to the deaf child, it's basic really. Obviously huge areas of poor support exist, mainstreaming isn't all roses, but you have to be in it, to win it, that's the reality. This also applies to the deaf adult, you have to be out there pitching for access, and usingthe inclusion you campaign for, staying inside a ghettosied 'community' is NOT going to advance your access one bit, but re-enforce the ghettoisation of deaf people.
Deaf lack confidence in their sign and their culture, and are fearful if they get 'out there' and work at it, they lose 'identity', this isn't true, unless you develop hearing ! Either we want access or we DO NOT, if we do, then a deaf 'community' isn't really helping if used to 'protect' deaf against the world, they just represent another barrier to overcome. All the concerns expressed by the signing community, are based on fear, and lack of real confidence, we need more role models who are out there, still deaf and signing, and not paranoid about losing 'culture' as a result, indeed such role models enhance it. We've listened too long to the whining deaf activists, who only want to be big fish in a little pond anyway, and more concerned with their status,than the advancement of deaf people.
A number enjoy being martyrs, which is anti-deaf.
Deaf lack confidence in their sign and their culture, and are fearful if they get 'out there' and work at it, they lose 'identity', this isn't true, unless you develop hearing ! Either we want access or we DO NOT, if we do, then a deaf 'community' isn't really helping if used to 'protect' deaf against the world, they just represent another barrier to overcome. All the concerns expressed by the signing community, are based on fear, and lack of real confidence, we need more role models who are out there, still deaf and signing, and not paranoid about losing 'culture' as a result, indeed such role models enhance it. We've listened too long to the whining deaf activists, who only want to be big fish in a little pond anyway, and more concerned with their status,than the advancement of deaf people.
A number enjoy being martyrs, which is anti-deaf.
Passcifist, are there still self-contained classrooms for the dhh? Here in the US, everyone thought that Deaf schools would have gone the way of the dodo by now. Yet b/c most schools can't provide the specialized early intervention base that we need, or b/c they can't teach kids who have fallen through the cracks, there are still many Deaf schools. I bet in ten years, some of those Deaf schools may reopen. History is repeating itself. In Germany a hundred years ago, they pushed mainstreaming(regular classes) Dhh kids, but with the exception of some very talented students, it really didn't benifit the dhh population as a whole.
Well I think part of the reason why literacy has not risen is b/c of improper EI. Dhh kids are getting EI, but it's general EI.(targeted towards people with developmental issues, ala Downs or cerebal palsy) Basicly, we need: teachers who are fluent in ASL and who have been trained to teach dhh kids how to speak. Many general EI speech therapists simply have basic training and may only know a handful of signs.
deafdyke said:
At F.E (Further Education) level, PHU's (Partial Hearing UNits), are definitely being used as pseudo deaf schools. A school within the school ! So 'mainstreaming' has been viewed with some suspicion because of how the deaf have used the areas alloted to them to circumvent 'mainstreaming' to a degree. The desire to be with other deaf still hasn't been addressed so that more integration techniques can work effectively. Deaf schools won't get a come back here, there's no real desire or cash to re-establish them.
Mainstreaming is still a dodgy system because of support options being a lottery of sorts. The UK has made more progress in mainstreaming than most. We've heard no talk really of a 'back to the past' approach. Secular groups in the UK have made inroads to our education, (religious, ethnic etc), and we hear the Deaf are trying to go the same road, but there's no unity of this, because the universal choice option means most think it unfair to set up have and have nots, by communication mode, and the issue of cultural groups operating independantly, is a moot one we all have reservations about.
Regardless HOW deaf cultural members see themselves, in the UK ALL support and Education and funding comes via 'Special need' or 'Disability' support, there's no real (i.e. LEGAL), recognition of a signed culture, because in the UK it is felt, we are all so different in need and approach it woud be unfair to highlight one child's need, (Or their parents preferences), are as being above the needs of anothers. It would in theory mean a division of deaf people by decibel, by mode by area by funding availability, which I think most would agree is not in the deaf child's interest or ours in the long run.
If we are to get rid of the very damaging arguments and divisions we all know and read about in the deaf/Deaf worlds then it has to start at day one,in education and there, these arguments dissalowed in. Then we might see them growing up and totally aceepting al deaf and HI regardless of mode used or loss, we can hope.... this does mean the adult with their own issues needs to stand back and allow that to happen, we may have had real problems, let us not, heap those problems on successive generations, let's end it here.
It's down to bad experieinces as adults, they revert to blaming the education they had as children. The issue probably there, is the education didn't actively involve the pitfalls we all have to expect and cannot avoid. Perhaps protected too much against life ? Mainstreaming in part is preparation, because yes, you will get discrimination there, so learn to face up to it.
Question period
Deafdyke,
Where do you feel the improper EI is occurring? What do you belive would be the best combination of EI? What do you believe is the most effective way to inform parents of all their options?
How do you see the provision of accurate language occurring when the parents/caregiver/school are not accurate models? What is the most effective way to improve language delay and enable dhh children to have and education equal or surpassing that of their hearing peers, as well as equal access to information, independantly?
Does a person need to approach the universities that offer B. Ed. and ensure that the topic of deafness is covered? Is this realistic? Who is going to decide what topics? Are they unbiased?
For me dd, it just goes on and on. I question the MO of some groups. Much of the downfall of deaf education, imo, is because of egoes. Inclusion and literacy are very important to me, as is finding the path of least resistance to obtain these goals.
deafdyke said:
Deafdyke,
Where do you feel the improper EI is occurring? What do you belive would be the best combination of EI? What do you believe is the most effective way to inform parents of all their options?
How do you see the provision of accurate language occurring when the parents/caregiver/school are not accurate models? What is the most effective way to improve language delay and enable dhh children to have and education equal or surpassing that of their hearing peers, as well as equal access to information, independantly?
Does a person need to approach the universities that offer B. Ed. and ensure that the topic of deafness is covered? Is this realistic? Who is going to decide what topics? Are they unbiased?
For me dd, it just goes on and on. I question the MO of some groups. Much of the downfall of deaf education, imo, is because of egoes. Inclusion and literacy are very important to me, as is finding the path of least resistance to obtain these goals.
Passfist, there will probaly always be some Deaf schools. For example a boarding school sitution would be perfect for kids in the foster system or from families that aren't exactly stable or desirable.
It sounds like you're idealizing the mainstream classroom. I was mainstreamed ALL my life, and trust me.....unless you're a Super Deaf, you get lumped in with the sped dumbasses, who are just in special ed b/c they either are really dumb and absolutly can't learn, or b/c they are totally apatehtic to learning. (note, I am NOT saying ALL sped kids are like that....but a lot of them are!)
I don't approve of total segregated learning......I really do think that kids should be exposed to all sorts of learning.......but some kids really do and can thrive in residental education.
There's a simlair controversy as to single sex education. I attended a single sex camp as a teen, and really loved it. It helped me really really bloom! Didin't make me scared of boys or whatever......
And yes, inclusion is important.......but what a lot of pro-inclusion folks don't realize is that inclusion and mainstreaming isn't some glorious utopia. I experianced it......and trust me......All that happens, unless the kid's a SuperDeaf is that we get lumped in with the sped slackers, who are just there b/c they are dumbasses or apathetic towards learning.
I am glad that I was exposed to the same curriculm as my hearing peers, but why the hell did I have to deal with being totally ostracized and isolated? Why did I have to deal with tacks on my chairs, and obscene letters written to me? Why did I have to deal with teachers and students assuming that I couldn't do something or wouldn't acheive anything? Trust me.......the mainstream is not all that great!
It sounds like you're idealizing the mainstream classroom. I was mainstreamed ALL my life, and trust me.....unless you're a Super Deaf, you get lumped in with the sped dumbasses, who are just in special ed b/c they either are really dumb and absolutly can't learn, or b/c they are totally apatehtic to learning. (note, I am NOT saying ALL sped kids are like that....but a lot of them are!)
I don't approve of total segregated learning......I really do think that kids should be exposed to all sorts of learning.......but some kids really do and can thrive in residental education.
There's a simlair controversy as to single sex education. I attended a single sex camp as a teen, and really loved it. It helped me really really bloom! Didin't make me scared of boys or whatever......
Well, in terms of EI, I think that the residental schools should be kind of the headquarters for EI. Maybe even offer a residental program, where parents and their kids can come for "summer camps" Also offer subsidized housing so it's easier for parents to relocate. I really do think that people cannot and should not project their biases about education, communication, etc on to their client base.
And yes, inclusion is important.......but what a lot of pro-inclusion folks don't realize is that inclusion and mainstreaming isn't some glorious utopia. I experianced it......and trust me......All that happens, unless the kid's a SuperDeaf is that we get lumped in with the sped slackers, who are just there b/c they are dumbasses or apathetic towards learning.
I am glad that I was exposed to the same curriculm as my hearing peers, but why the hell did I have to deal with being totally ostracized and isolated? Why did I have to deal with tacks on my chairs, and obscene letters written to me? Why did I have to deal with teachers and students assuming that I couldn't do something or wouldn't acheive anything? Trust me.......the mainstream is not all that great!