Speaking and signing called key to richer life

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



how am i wrong? How many DOZENS of times have i been told here that i am restricting my daughter because her school uses spoken language, even though we sign at home, she attends an asl church, goes to deaf community activites, and even has an asl tutor.

what about that situation is "limiting" and "forcing"?

You are restricting her in a vitally important area: EDUCATIONALLY.

thanks again for showing deafgal that my previous post was, in fact, true.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



but you would require that they use that language to communicate with their child from day one. That the child's primary and most important language model be someone that you claim can not acheieve acceptable fluency even after many years.

You have virtually no idea what I would require or what I recommend and advocate for. Your consistent misinterpretation of my posts proves that hands down.

then stand up and tell me how i have misinterpreted your position. What do you advocate for, if not asl used by the family and in school?

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



thanks again for showing deafgal that my previous post was, in fact, true.

How many times do people have to say it before you get it? My post, as well, is true. An oral only educational environment restricts deaf children. The very description--oral only--indicates restriction. It is a feature of the program.

The problem is that you just don't want to accept the truth of the matter. If you are really okay with restricting your child to an oral only environment educationally, you wouldn't be on here arguing and trying to get people to think that it's something other than what it is. You would be secure enough in your decision to say, "Yeah, it restricts her to oral only in an educational setting, but I am okay with taking those risks."

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



then stand up and tell me how i have misinterpreted your position. What do you advocate for, if not asl used by the family and in school?

Sorry, I sit when I'm at the computer. And you have been told numerous times over a period of a couple of years what I advocate for. You just ignore it each and every time so you'll have a target to throw your own insecurities toward. You attempt to discredit me because you are unable to find anything that does not support my position. You are terribly afraid that you have not made the proper decision, and therefore, explode anytime anyone; me or the deaf members who have been there; logically and intelligently exposes the faults in your reasoning.

You really need to stop believing that every thing that is said is about you or your kid. The world is bigger than the little space you take up.

 

[faire_jour]

How many times do people have to say it before you get it? My post, as well, is true. An oral only educational environment restricts deaf children. The very description--oral only--indicates restriction. It is a feature of the program.

The problem is that you just don't want to accept the truth of the matter. If you are really okay with restricting your child to an oral only environment educationally, you wouldn't be on here arguing and trying to get people to think that it's something other than what it is. You would be secure enough in your decision to say, "Yeah, it restricts her to oral only in an educational setting, but I am okay with taking those risks."

Actually, they emphasis written English as much as a bi-bi school, so if they are oral only, bi-bi is ASL only.

 

[jillio]

Actually, they emphasis written English as much as a bi-bi school, so if they are oral only, bi-bi is ASL only.

Nice try, but again you are incorrect. Stop looking for ways to put down bi-bi education. Just because you chose to move your daughter to an oral only program is not an excuse to find things wrong with bi-bi. Especially when you are just making up anything that pops into your head.Take responsibility for your decision.

 

[faire_jour]

Nice try, but again you are incorrect. Stop looking for ways to put down bi-bi education. Just because you chose to move your daughter to an oral only program is not an excuse to find things wrong with bi-bi. Take responsibility for your decision.

How is it different? You choose to see it as oral only, but they have equal emphasis on written language. So, it is in no way "oral only". How is that different from a bi-bi school? (One uses English, the other ASL, and they both use written English).

 

[jillio]

How is it different? You choose to see it as oral only, but they have equal emphasis on written language. So, it is in no way "oral only". How is that different from a bi-bi school? (One uses English, the other ASL, and they both use written English).

Because bi-bi uses ASL and English. Oral only uses only English in 2 modes. I would think, with all the knowledge you claim to have, that you would already grasp this elementary concept. "Bi" means "two". In the case of bi-bi education the first bi is for 2 languages, and the second bi is for 2 cultures.

And before you start in on the fact that bi-bi doesn't offer speech classes, etc.: it doesn't matter. They teach English. They use texts written in English. The language of instruction is ASL. E.g. two languages.

Oral only used 2 modes of one language: English.

I can't explain it any more concisely. But I'm sure that you will still argue the point because you simply refuse to accept the obvious and have, as your only motive, trying to justify a decision you are not as confident about as you would like others to believe.

 

[faire_jour]

Because bi-bi uses ASL and English. Oral only uses only English in 2 modes. I would think, with all the knowledge you claim to have, that you would already grasp this elementary concept. "Bi" means "two". In the case of bi-bi education the first bi is for 2 languages, and the second bi is for 2 cultures.

And before you start in on the fact that bi-bi doesn't offer speech classes, etc.: it doesn't matter. They teach English. They use texts written in English. The language of instruction is ASL. E.g. two languages.

Oral only used 2 modes of one language: English.

I can't explain it any more concisely. But I'm sure that you will still argue the point because you simply refuse to accept the obvious and have, as your only motive, trying to justify a decision you are not as confident about as you would like others to believe.

I didn't say it was bilingual. I said it wasn't "oral only". I said that if you call a listening and spoken language program as "oral only" you could also call a bi-bi school "ASL only". Neither is true.

 

[jillio]

I didn't say it was bilingual. I said it wasn't "oral only". I said that if you call a listening and spoken language program as "oral only" you could also call a bi-bi school "ASL only". Neither is true.

Keep trying. You cannot call a bi-bi school "ASL" only. However, you can call an oral only school only because the language of instruction is spoken English, and they do not allow students to use sign but they must respond with speech to anything going on in the classroom.

You are really reaching here. But I guess I have to give you credit for persistence. No matter how many times you are shown to be wrong, you keep asking the same things over and over and over and over and over............ad infinitum.

To paraphrase another member, I am tired of beating a dead horse.

 

[faire_jour]

Keep trying. You cannot call a bi-bi school "ASL" only. However, you can call an oral only school only because the language of instruction is spoken English, and they do not allow students to use sign but they must respond with speech to anything going on in the classroom.

You are really reaching here. But I guess I have to give you credit for persistence. No matter how many times you are shown to be wrong, you keep asking the same things over and over and over and over and over............ad infinitum.

And the language of instruction in a bi-bi school is...............ASL!

I am not arguing that bi-bi is not the proper term for ASL-English programs, I am saying that "oral only" just plain isn't true. (Oh, and kids sign in oral programs all the time!!)

 

[jillio]

And the language of instruction in a bi-bi school is...............ASL!

I am not arguing that bi-bi is not the proper term for ASL-English programs, I am saying that "oral only" just plain isn't true. (Oh, and kids sign in oral programs all the time!!)

Leave that poor horse alone. You have reduced it to a pile of dust. Have some mercy on the poor beast. Your reasoning is faulty. Just accept it.:roll: If kids are signing in oral programs, they aren't oral programs. They are technically TC programs. Please understand the terminology you attempt to use.

 

[faire_jour]

Leave that poor horse alone. You have reduced it to a pile of dust. Have some mercy on the poor beast. Your reasoning is faulty. Just accept it.:roll:

You mean that I made a point that you would have to concede so now you refuse to discuss it.

 

[jillio]

You mean that I made a point that you would have to concede so now you refuse to discuss it.

No, that isn't what I meant at all. Only you would think that. You really have issues you need to deal with.

What I meant was just what I said. You say the same thing over and over, try using different words, and come up with absurd comparisons all in an attempt to justify the decision you made. Get over yourself. You are annoying at best. That is what I meant.

 

[deafgal001]

You are restricting her in a vitally important area: EDUCATIONALLY.

I do not really trust all parents when they say "... BUT I am providing ASL!" Just like I don't trust them when they say "I am providing sex education"

Which is important to me that there must be some ASL lessons in school. They can heavily focus Oralism all they want though.

 

[AlleyCat]

Keep trying. You cannot call a bi-bi school "ASL" only. However, you can call an oral only school only because the language of instruction is spoken English, and they do not allow students to use sign but they must respond with speech to anything going on in the classroom.

You are really reaching here. But I guess I have to give you credit for persistence. No matter how many times you are shown to be wrong, you keep asking the same things over and over and over and over and over............ad infinitum.

To paraphrase another member, I am tired of beating a dead horse.

To the bolded part - exactly! It would be an ASL-ASL only or one-one school.

 

[Miss-Delectable]

Someone ought call the RSPCA about that poor horse.

 

[shel90]

Nice try, but again you are incorrect. Stop looking for ways to put down bi-bi education. Just because you chose to move your daughter to an oral only program is not an excuse to find things wrong with bi-bi. Especially when you are just making up anything that pops into your head.Take responsibility for your decision.

Jillio...just give it up. It is apparent that she will always find fault with ASL, the BiBi approach and Deaf people. Let her go.

 

[deafdyke]

Exactly, this is why so many of us who have grown up HoH or oral deaf end up learning sign language and seeking out the Deaf community later in life. We become sick and tired of sitting around a table, jerking our heads rapidly from face to face trying to follow the conversation and missing most of it anyway.

Sure, I can have 1 on 1 conversations without problem when there is no background noise, but I can't conduct my entire social life in that manner, and social interaction is just as important as 1 on 1.

I wish I had learned ASL when I was younger, but nobody figured it was important for me because I was "doing fine" without it.

I think a really good idea might be to suggest exposure to ASL and Deaf programs or Deaf camps around third or fourth grade for oral dhh kids. Not all oral kids will cotton to ASL and Deaf culture......but it does seem like oral mainstreamed kids having trouble in later elementary is VERY VERY common. It even happens to many of the superstars! I think too Deaf Schools should offer outreach to kids who want to learn ASL as a second language...It does seem that a lot of today's parents aren't nessarily anti ASL oral, but more "I want my kid to have spoken English as a first language. They can learn ASL later." Granted a lot of oral deaf kids will still have hoh style spoken language delays, and you have a lot of parents going " gotta wait til they're caught up in speech" :roll: Idealisticly dhh kids should be able to learn BOTH languages simulatanously!!!!! Audilogically hoh kids can (and do) Hearing kids learn two spoken languages simatansously. CODAs do!!!

You are restricting her in a vitally important area: EDUCATIONALLY.

Good point. She's learning spoken language yes....but is she advanced enough to use spoken language to actually LEARN content? Like she could be at a 4th grade level when using ASL to learn, but be at a kindergarten or preschool level with English

 

[Bebonang]

Aren't I then also "forcing" my child to attend a school where ASL is the primary language in use? If our 3, 4 ... 8 year olds had their way, they'd be using whatever language they find on TV or their video games, eating candy rather than veggies, and certainly not taking baths or going to bed at night.

Making a decision about sending a child to an ASL school where spoken language is also permitted and supported OR a mainstream or oral school where ASL is permitted and supported -- where the child's carefully constructed and customized IEP is being addressed appropriately -- is not "forcing" a young child against his or her will, it's called responsible parenting.

I make two bold statements which I agree with you on this. This is what I would want to have education on learning to sign in ASL and then have an interpreters in mainstream or oral-only school so that I can follow what everyone in the classroom, both in elementary and high school, easier for me to know what the lessons that we were suppose to learn and in order to make the grades A to B better than C- to D-. Trying to lipread is not going to solve getting to understand and trying to get better grades. It just make me frustrated as hell when I could not understand what the subjects that I need to know. You and FJ, you were talking about listening so that you expect your daughters to listen in the oral-only classrooms with CI. That is what make me laugh. It is the same with hearing aids, too many years ago. CI devices is still a tool for them to hear, not to listen. So both of you, get off the high horse. Sorry for being soooo blunt. :P