I would like to add a few things for clarification especially for MDKM. I wish to have this discussion to be continued with cordial approach. It is correct that ASL is not the only first language of Deaf children since there are different sign languages found in different countries.
Coming from Newport, Suppalla, Bavelier:
"Sign Language (ASL), the visual-gestural language predominant in the deaf community of the United States and other parts of North America.
Cochlear implants, however, still cannot make a profoundly deaf child become a native user of oral language. Success of implants, thus far, at least, has been gauged by the ability of children to understand low-level speech sounds (such as the ability to discriminate between a “p” and a “b”), usually not by the child’s ability to comprehend and use full normal speech. Available research indicates that how well children with cochlear implants perform on simple audiological tests does not translate directly into skill in receiving and expressing language.
Research on a strain of congenitally deaf white cats by the group of Rainer Klinke and Andrej Kral in Germany showed that by adulthood a cat’s deprived auditory cortex has lost the ability to respond adequately to cochlear implants. Therefore, implantation needs to happen while the primary auditory cortex is still developing and maturing. We do not yet know if this is true for humans.
Pediatric clinical trials indicate that children who received implants before two years of age performed better on acoustic tests than those who received implants when they were between two and three. We still do not know, however, how successful these children will be in acquiring natural language.
Another vital consideration is what language exposure to give implanted children whose success with auditory language is unclear. Given the uncertainty in predicting the outcomes of cochlear implantation, it may be wise to expose children to a full natural language like ASL as a safety net.
So these researchers had studied and demonstrated the fact that it is always best to incorporate ASL in their childhood lives so why gamble? What AFA is promoting for ASL to be a part of every Deaf child’s early language acquisition stage not to exclude anything. It is not fair to say that this organization supports something just because a demonstrator who is not even a spokesperson said it is.
Also, the research statement above suggests that those who use SEE, Cued speech, etc. as a part of the "total communication system" are not as equivalent to deaf native signers and those who used oral-only approach with cochlear implants. That is why it is not suggestive to use Manually Coded English (MCE) system especially at school. It is interesting to note that this research has shown that oral-only children do not do better than deaf native signers and those who use MCE are worse than these groups. That is why it is so important to re-evaluate Deaf educational program that two languages are to be kept separate and that the CAEBER of Gallaudet developed a bilingual framework (signacy, literacy, and oracy).
However, when it comes to home use, parents' non-native like signing skills do have a positive impact on their Deaf child. For their parents to sign some is better than not signing at all. That is why there is a need of funding for ASL therapists to work with hearing families of Deaf children. Research points out that the degree of ASL proficiency that Deaf children develop during the Elementary school years, no matter if their parents are Deaf or hearing, is positively related to the development of English reading and writing skills (Cummins, 2006).
Another clarification that needs to be made is the number of research documents. It is not correct to assume that there are many Deaf children who are successful with oral-only or MCE approach as opposed to numerous documents showing achievement in language development since there is a positive relationship between ASL and English as indicated by researchers above. So why resist ASL as a first language if that is an easy way out for Deaf children? They should not have to struggle and go through a hard way to acquire English that is not natural for them. It is just a no-brainer.
Barb DiGi
A special thanks to Barb for allowing me to use this as a blog entry.
This is specifically for Miss Kat's Parents (Miss Deaf Kat's Mom, MDKM), but anyone who wishes to comment on this is equally welcomed. No one can say better than Barb, not even those righteous people who SCREAM left and right about RESPECT. Just don't be a hen, like AG Bell's sidekicks.
What year was the Newport et al. article published? Their description of what children with cochlear implants can achieve sounds quite out of date. There is no doubt at all now that deaf children who are implanted as early as 12 months DO become native users of whatever spoken language they are exposed to.
ReplyDeleteIt was published in 2003. Not that outdated though.
ReplyDeleteIf it was published in 2003, it means the data they used are at least 10 years old now. (It takes time to collect data, analyze it, get it published, etc.) Cochlear implant technology has come a long way in 10 years.
ReplyDeleteOne of the newest reference is 2002 so still it is less than 10 years ago.
ReplyDeleteFYI, much evidence suggests that, among the profoundly deaf, better speech, lipreading, and reading
abilities are shown by native signers (Meadow 1966). There is no reason to be afraid of having your Deaf child using ASL since there are more benefits growing up bilingual. We really have nothing to lose so why debate to exclude ASL?
I worked with a few students who were implanted around 2 and 3 years and they were native users of spoken English. The statement that all profoundly deaf children who have been implanted cannot be native users of oral language is not true. These implanted children I worked with who had natural spoken language skills did not use ASL or any sort of visual language system, but they had amazing parental support, auditory training and speech, and access to good education. Some other implanted children I worked with did not have good spoken and/or signed language skills due to a number of reasons, particularly due to the lack of parent support, auditory training, and followups with the doctors and audiologists. One of them went to a school for the deaf. Language acquisition occurs when parents are willing to put in the hard work in communicating with their children whether they use sign language or spoken language.
ReplyDeleteFor everyone's benefit, the first article is available in whole at http://www.dana.org/news/cerebrum/detail.aspx?id=2904 .
ReplyDeleteI agree with SK3 that the information about cochlear implant in the article seems to be old. More and more recent researches show that the cochlear implant improves speech discrimination among many – but not all - deaf kids who receive cochlear implant at very early age and this improvement results in better English skills for them when compared with the deaf kids without cochlear implant. Also, it seems that it becomes a trend for deaf babies to have bilateral cochlear implant. Whether this will make any big improvement remains to be seen.
The benefits of naturalness sometimes are overrated. This is true for the article. The human brain is very plastic and adaptive and it does not surprise me that the recent researches show that the brains in the deaf kids that receive cochlear implant at very early age are able to adapt to the so-called artificial sounds. We need to discard the assumption that the naturalness is somehow superior to the artificiality in respect to the language acquisition.
I am sure that Miss Kat's Parents (or Mom) already know this and they (or she) already have Miss Kat as the real, living proof.
Joseph Pietro Riolo
josephpietrojeungriolo@gmail.com
Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.
Barb, now you're citing research that's more than 40 years old to make your case? You're really not helping yourself here. Yes, 40 years ago kids who were native signers did better than kids who were not. Of course, often hearing loss wasn't identified until the child was 4 years old. Today with early identification and early implantation, as well as parental support, deaf children can learn language through hearing. This does not preclude the use of sign language, but you simply can't make the case any more that deaf kids will only be able to succeed if they have ASL as a first language.
ReplyDeleteAnd I totally support deaf children growing up bilingual, but why limit them to ASL as their second language? A deaf child who is able to learn language through hearing can learn Spanish or French or Hebrew or Swahili or any other language their parents desire. Why limit them?
ReplyDeleteSK3,
ReplyDeleteWould it be appropriate to have College Bowl Competition(high school) between those Deaf teenagers such as oralist(bilingual with other auditory language such as Spanish,etc) and Bilingual Deaf(bilingual with ASL and English) and compete their functionally as a normal person. The results will tell you the outcome of each ideology.
No, Mr. Egbert, it would not be appropriate. I prefer not to judge a person's academic or social competence based on a game show performance.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDrats! I was in a hurry as I have to waltz out the door so my second take on this:
ReplyDeleteOh S3K and JPR, I can't help but slap my head or maybe I should use yours that you should have known there are numerous research showing that native signers tend to become better spoken language users as it has been around since the research 40 years ago. There are many that had published similar findings such as this: Deaf children of deaf parents often demonstrate a significant linguistic advantage in spoken English over deaf children of hearing parents (Geers & Schick,
1988).
Nothing much have changed though. It makes a lot of sense that once a Deaf child understand the use of language let it be through ASL, it makes it easier to learn speech. Sharon Graney, a speech-pathologist, stated that a child
should be primarily exposed only to sign language and that spoken English skills could be taught after the child has mastered his or her first language (ASL).
"Cochlear implants provide auditory information by directly stimulating the cochlea.
Although they may increase awareness of sound, their success rate in contributing to
developing oral language skills has been minimal in children who had not already learned
spoken English before their hearing loss" (Crouch, 1997). Yes, it is a bit more than 10 years ago but again there is insufficient research showing that they are to be native spoken language users.
I want to make it clear that I am not here to argue about Deaf children using BOTH speech and signs as long as it is used at a different time keeping two languages separate. It is a matter of which should be first and so far many research documents are pointing out the best outcome to use ASL as a first language. Using English as a first language for the Deaf child may limit the potential language development of the child while ASL doesn't at all so why take a risk? In fact, the brain is so elastic that it can obtain two languages at once. Just don't exclude ASL.
As for these few deaf children described in the thread, I cannot evaluate or verify that they are native spoken language users since it is based on one person's perspective, not by a speech-pathologist. However, I will take your word for it but I am to go with what research documents said based on numerous studies.
On the other hand when sharing my professional perspective, I do see a plenty of deaf children coming in a school for the Deaf at the age 7 or more with cochlear implants or hearing aids that they don't exhibit as native oral speakers AND unfortunately, they experienced delay in language development and academics. They were from mainstreamed programs whose oral approach had failed them. It is still happening TODAY!
SK3,
ReplyDeleteThen how can a parent make a full informed decision for their Deaf baby without an outcome of which ideology to be successful?
Mr. Egbert, would you base your child's educational choice on a the results of a game show? If you have nothing else to go on, then I would feel very sad for your child.
ReplyDeleteJust a random article. There are many more like this one. http://archotol.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/130/5/644.pdf
SK3,
ReplyDeleteI have two successful Deaf children growing up bilingual: ASL and English. Both work at TSD in Austin, TX. One is a principal in the elementary school and ECE(Early Childhood Education) and the other is the System Technician.
Many parents became proud of their Deaf children involved with College Bowl and it is not just a game show.
SK3, you can downgrade the College Bowl as a game show but it proves that the language is the name of the game to win the College Bowl.
You are the one is playing the game protecting the ones that can't effectively compete in the Deaf College Bowl.
BTW, what does this have to do with Miss Kat's Parents? Doesn't she use ASL with her daughter? I wish more parents were as involved as her.
ReplyDeleteGood question from e,
ReplyDeleteI really believe that Miss Kat's mom is a good parent and there are those concern that she could be misguided, that's all.
I see and work with plenty of deaf/hh students from preschool to senior in high school. All communicate in different ways, have different degrees of hearing loss, different personalities and families. No one can say that one way of education and communication is the best for all deaf and hard of hearing children. I have worked in various schools for the deaf including AASD and Lexington School for the Deaf. I worked in Oral/Speech schools, mainstreamed programs, private schools for the deaf using alternative means of education, and others. I know and have met different deaf and hard of hearing people, as many of you have. I can say, from my experience, that supportive stable parents produce the most successful and happy deaf/hh individuals, not parents who expect the schools to raise their children for them. The supportive parents usually are able to find effective ways of communicating and interacting with their children, whether they choose to sign or not.
ReplyDeleteThe same can be said for children with typical hearing. I see so many students with typical hearing who struggle in school, not just deaf/hh students.
e)
ReplyDeleteHow true about parents. Sometimes I say that it is the parents that are the special needs to be educated. Their Deaf babies are prime ripe ready to learn but it is the parents that don't know what to do and often they are mislead into an ideology that does more harm than good which proofs why the Deaf education is still a big huge problem today.
e)
ReplyDeleteI should have used the word proves instead of proofs in my comment above.
I knew you meant proves.
ReplyDeleteMy god, yes, deaf education is filled with problems! Just going to do my best in keeping an open mind, supporting my students, and patiently teaching parents and teachers about deaf/hh issues and language acquisition.
You know that there are actually studies that show that oral kids end up better reader than signers, right? (Geers & Moog 1989) It doesn't mean that it is true for all, but there certainly is data to back up AV and oral methodology starting in the 70's and going to today. In fact, there was a very recent, longitudinal study that showed that AV kids end up catching up to hearing kids in math, reading, language, speech and self esteem (ALL AREAS STUDIED) which has NEVER before been seen.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is that EARLY language is what matters. Not which language it is. There are soooooo many kids that are appropriately amplified and enrolled in early intervention by 3-6 months old and end up acquiring English with ZERO delays. Should they learn ASL? SURE! Do they have to in order to be successful and have appropriate linguistic and cognitive development? No way.
The fact is that spoken language works great for many kids. It doesn't work for all though. So, sometimes we do end up with "oral failures". Kids with huge language deficits. Why? I attribute it to lack of parental involvement, NOT to oralism.
A responsible oral parent is involved, knows their child's language development, know if their child is making progress, works with professionals to ensure that their child is doing well. Simply slapping hearing aids on a kid and pretending they are hearing is NOT what any responsible org., professional or ANYONE recommends. Unfortunately, there lazy parents in the world. They are the ones who end up with kids walking into Kindergarten with no language. Again though, I have seen this with both oral AND signing families. I have met parents who have a 12 year old deaf child who is supposed to be an ASL user, but the child signs at a patetic level and the parents even less so....so there are "failures" on every side of the fence.
I don't want to get into a "study challenge" because the truth is, AV has PLENTY to back it up. I personally think it is a great idea to sign with all kids with a hearing loss, but you know what, I am not all parents. I have personally seen dedicated parents who research and simply come to a different conclusion than I did. They choose to focus their efforts on ensuring language immersion through amplification, instead of learning a new language and the struggles that come with attempting to educate a child through a language you yourself do not know. I know many kids who have turned out AMAZING through their efforts too.
I feel your position as a teacher and want the best for the Deaf children. We all have different strategy to reach the best for the children but seems too many different ideology approach whether it is monetary or morality towards the Deaf babies and children is the appropriate way to go. Money always win. But the Deaf community will prevail with the truth of the mission, morality.
ReplyDeleteOh, and the very fact that the study says that CI kids can not understand full spoken language shows that it is either terribly out of date or simple so biased that it refuses to see the truth. My own child who was VERY late implanted is able to hold complex conversations in the car, sitting behind me, completely unable to see my lips. Her results are considered VERY TYPICAL and not at all unexpected. Nearly every child I know with an implant is able to do the same thing.
ReplyDeleteEveryone including Miss Kat's parent,
ReplyDeleteThe success of your achievement counts when your Deaf child is 18 years of age.
Mine is successful.
Your child needs the maturity of the age of 18 to proclaim the success of your belief of your ideology.
Please be patience with your bloat of your achievement.
I have been there and you haven't yet if your child is under 18 years old.
Sit on the sideline and start listening to those that are successful before you get too much egg on your face when your child is 18 years old. Many failed and I sincerely hope your child will succeed.
I want to respond to this quote as well...
ReplyDelete"Research on a strain of congenitally deaf white cats by the group of Rainer Klinke and Andrej Kral in Germany showed that by adulthood a cat’s deprived auditory cortex has lost the ability to respond adequately to cochlear implants. Therefore, implantation needs to happen while the primary auditory cortex is still developing and maturing. We do not yet know if this is true for humans."
Yep. That is why people advocate for EARLY IMPLANTATION! The evidence shows that by about age 8, if the auditory cortex is not developed, it simple NEVER will be! If a child is not able to understand spoken language without lipreading by that age, they NEVER will. Sure, they can learn to speak. Speech is a skill. But LISTENING and UNDERSTANDING spoken language, that will simply be impossible.
Jay Wyant, former President of AGBell got bilateral CI and he doesn't have good speech and still rely on lipreading to function to have some form of communication modality with the hearing society, I say that it is not as normal as I had before I learned ASL to be bilingual. I became a normal person once I learned ASL.
ReplyDeleteBilingualism: ASL and English is the solution to the problems we have now with Deaf Education today but the monetary ideology off of Deaf babies and children overcome the morality needs for the Deaf babies and children in schools.
Which you choose as part of the humanity towards Deaf babies and children in schools?
You decide what kind of person you want to be.
John,
ReplyDeleteI am not saing that my child is successful yet. Not at all. We have yet to even cross the "4th grade reading level" bubble, so we have many years of work ahead of us!
However, I do know many parents of the first generation of early implanted kids. Their kids are now adults and we are seeing a generation of deaf kids, who grew up with spoken language and CIs who THRIVED. They didn't fall behind and end up transfering out. They didn't get left behind in mainstream schools, struggling impossibly to lipread teachers, pretending to understand peers....they could HEAR and understand!
The only thing that I was using my child as an example of was typical hearing with a cochlear implant. The average child implanted in early childhood (say, before age 3 or so) will be able to understand spoken language without lipreading (barring a handicap and with appropriate follow up). That is simply a fact.
Again John, by saying that an oral deaf person has poor speech and lipreads inspite of having implants is another arguement FOR early implantation. He was unable to develop his auditory cortex, and now must rely on visual pathways to receive information. Perhaps if he had been implanted in childhood his speech and listening skills would be improved....but in the end that doesn't matter since he is clearly successful just the way he is.
ReplyDeleteMiss Kat's Parent,
ReplyDeleteThat is your opinion and there are many that are not succeeding.
Please think of the majority that failed to achieve of the few that's leading you to...
It is best to wait till your child is 18 years old before your blah, blah, blah can be accepted.
Let's establish the success of your achievement when Miss Kat is 18 years old...then you can bloat your success. Meantime, focus on your success and stop the blah, blah,blah for now. You need to prove your achievement first.
That applies to many of others assuming that your Deaf child will be OK with the ideology that you are using now, I would like to hear from you too when your child is 18 years old.
I care for your child but you have the right to decide what to do and it is your consequence of your informed decision.
They may hear and understand but not everything unlike in an ASL environment which is 100 percent. There are noises in the classrooms that can easily interrupt their reception of information that may not be so complete. How a cochlear implant functions is different than how a hearing person hears and that the number of channels are significantly different.
ReplyDeleteI would have to dismiss Ann Geers's statements since she tends to be biased and her name is more prevalent in those for-oral so-called research documents telling me that a limited pool of researchers are involved. Geers's name appears in almost entire for-oral research unlike ASL research documents that are written by various researchers.
Not just an early language is what matters but it is reasoning and cognitive skills. Which language does matter since we must evaluate its effectiveness of accessibility for the deaf child. Most of the studies show that Deaf children's learning style is visual so it makes more sense for them to perceive information through ASL that acts as a primary language and able to codeswitch to English through literacy and/or oracy.
Don't forget that there are plenty of studies showing babies who hear benefit more when learning signs. Really, MKM, what are you arguing about? You started ASL with your baby and now a fine girl who is capable of speaking. Why is it so shameful to admit that ASL helped your daughter to thrive into spoken language?
These kids who "made it" are lucky because it is not the case around where I work when dealing with new deaf students TODAY. Students who acquired ASL as a first early language and immersed in a bilingual education tend to pass Regents (state exam) with flying colors while students who come from an oral background even with cochlear implants have a much more bumpier ride to pass the Regents. I can tell you this from 19 years of teaching Regents Social Studies. I have credibility and I am a professional. Do not dismiss to what I have to say since nothing can change this very fact in my eyes.
Yes, of course, parental involvement is the key to a child's success. There are also definite factors such as biological function, state of health, IQ, learning disabilities, etc. that affect the development of spoken language, however, they tend to drastically improve when they are exposed to ASL. I can tell you there were countless of them based on my 19 years of career experience in a school for the Deaf. Even these "oral failures" whose parents are involved happened because oralism didn't work for them, not because of the lack of parental involvement which is not the case.
It is always better for parents to sign some than nothing. With increased funding for ASL instruction and therapuetic activities, it shouldn't be too hard. Instead, it will bond the family more and be happier. That was the outcome for hearing babies/children so why not for Deaf babies/children? It worked for you so...frankly, I don't see the problem here on what you are arguing about. Deaf community and professionals are here and we say well HELLO!
Nah, we can't compare humans to cat. My point of showing that statement is to see how these researchers are comparing an anatomy of the ear of a cat to a Deaf baby, good heavens! Deaf babies are not animals! We don't know that for sure what would happen to the auditory function when Deaf children get older. There are times when it can be broken or that the inner function of the ear no longer works. There are numerous cases demonstrating these former CI wearers who experienced rejection of foreign objects and painful effects leading surgical procedures to have the implant removed. That's why it is always good to have ASL ready to communicate. It is much smarter to have both languages rather than gamble with a child without ASL.
You dismiss Ann Geer's findings because she has a lot of publications? Because she's been doing research for years? That makes no sense at all. Of course she's cited in many publications. She's been doing research on deaf children and language acquisition for DECADES. For you to dismiss her findings is just foolish.
ReplyDeleteIt is not about Ann Geers personally but about the publications itself that are not by various researchers. It is just by a limited number of pool of reseachers for-oral so you cannot possibly accept these findings from the same person since it has to be proven from various resources.
ReplyDeleteYou really don't understand how research is done and published, do you?
ReplyDeleteMaking a statement about an early implantation of CI on all (it seems to imply) kids are guaranteed to understand complex sentence auditory. Sounds quite a bit of a bias to me. I've talked to a CI person over the telephone via VCO and she couldn't understand what I said. The interpreter said I spoke quite clear enough and yet this CI person didn't comprehend what I said?
ReplyDeleteSo, please remember those CI kids are Deaf, whether you like it or not, period. All the more power to them if they're able to speak and hear, but please... quit flaunting it because it does make the other Deaf children feel small.
Is that the name of the game? Belittling other Deaf kids who are unable to hear and speak by flaunting the success of other Deaf kids?
Please grow up. Have some dignity and compassion.
Yes, my daughter used ASL as her first language, and it helped her cogitive development. She had language and was able to communicate. It did NOT help her develop spoken English. In fact, we had to go back and reteach things that non ASL using kids develop normally. She really struggled with English grammer and syntax because her first language was so dramatically different from English. She spoke exactly like poor Deaf writers write. It was a huge mountain that we had to overcome. Would I go back and not sign over it? Of course not. Language is much more important and without ASL she would have been lost. But please do not assume that ASL translates to spoken language fluency (or even written English, as there is no research that shows that either).
ReplyDeleteMKM...I draw a line at your comment "...poor Deaf writers write..." That's a bit patronizing and looking down on us the minority and it's not fair. I know MANY Deaf people who write as well as OR better than hearing people and that's OK.
ReplyDeleteMoog and Geers are audists and liars! They are not telling truth about their papers and research. I would not hold breath for them.
ReplyDeleteThey are nothing but plain audists!
About the cat study: people are not cats. Studies from the area of stroke recovery are showing that there is much more plasticity in the (older) adult human brain than has been previously appreciated. It is seeming more likely that the loss of plasticity with maturity has been greatly overestimated.
ReplyDeleteIf this is true, then parents do *not* need to be rushed to make a decision by X months for fear that they will "forever ruin your child's chance at a normal life". I see a lot of oversell with CI's and a lot of wildly excessive expectations.
David
I have only been able to observe and interact with a few score implanted deaf children. However, my direct observations support the idea that failing to sign with deaf infants and children results in language deprivation and delay. Early implantation *cannot* be depended upon to prevent this, since there is great variation in how quickly a CI provides full access to spoken language.
ReplyDeleteIt is true that many deaf children and adults have overcome language delays (and that many have not). However, the time and work to overcome language delay is time and work not available for other learning and development. Everyone has exactly the same number of hours in a day and in a year.
Overall, your child is more likely to become a successful, well-educated, well-adjusted, and well-socialized adult if you sign with him or her when they are small.
This is based on personal observations of several score implanted children, a couple score implanted teens & young adults, and several hundred Deaf & deaf adults, both bilingual-bimodal and oral-only.
David
My Deaf children did not have problems transferring from ASL to English as they are reading and writing above their grade level. It has a lot to do with using bilingual approach that is practiced in schools by teachers who are fluent in both languages. There has to be a bridge, a link from ASL to English and it is unfortunate that many Deaf Education programs do not prepare the teachers well for that.
ReplyDeleteSK3, you are way off the point. Actually, I am laughing at your comment since you have no idea who you are dealing with. Is that the best you can do? You just said it because you want to put me down attempting to discredit my work and make Geers and yourself look good. Nice try. A lot of people email me for giving them information relating to bilingual documents even for legal purposes. As a result, they have gained success from it and I do it for FREE. I have a full file of numerous bilingual research since I had completed my most recent studies from CAEBER program that focuses on bilingual strategies and practices. As an expert professional, I am entitled to say that the research favoring oralism is mostly biased since it is mostly from the same person, Geers. No need to get personal about me since it is not about me. It is about exposing the truth that Geers monopolizes the research field relating to oralism. (scoff)
This website offers an excellent sight of case studies and research information on should we sign with Deaf children regardless of cochlear implantation use.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.whysign.com/
Barb..
ReplyDeleteIf you have not read this, you should.
http://www.thereadingrhizome.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Enhancing-education-for-deaf-children.pdf
Barb, you know that I said "poor Deaf writers" because that is exactly what I meant. If I had thought all Deaf people struggled with writing, I would have said that. I explicitly said those who do write poorly.
ReplyDeleteAnd this:
ReplyDeletehttp://jdsde.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2007/06/12/deafed.enm020.full
No, Barb, it's not the best I can do, but it's not worth my time. Sending out articles does not make you an expert on analyzing research. Case studies are just that -- case studies (one person succeeded doing something), and do not make a case for anything. You cannot generalize the findings from case studies. I don't have to make myself look good. This isn't about me. But it always concerns me when people who really don't know what they're talking about pronounce themselves as "experts." And yes, I know who you are.
ReplyDeleteI give Miss Kat's mom a lot of credit for keeping on with this pointless dialog. You wouldn't believe it if you saw the evidence with your own eyes. Miss Kat's mom already has.
There are plenty of evidence showing that bilingual works, SK3. Yes, I can say that I am an expert whether you like it or not since I hold several college degrees in Deaf Ed and got a CAEBER certificate recently completing two years. Working for almost 20 years carrying dual teaching certificates do qualify for me to know what is going on with Deaf children, understand the studies and see the outcomes when many Deaf children coming to school with no languages because oral had failed them.
ReplyDeleteYou know me but I don't know you so it is not fair for you to continue to attack me blindfolded here. I would suggest you to refrain from this discussion since I will not reply to you who is an anonymous since there is no credibility.
In my response to MKM, I am just making it clear that ASL as a first language is a natural language more than English for Deaf children and there are many studies proving that. You wouldn't believe if you saw the evidence of oral failures either.
SK3, you're really nasty. Looking down at Deaf professionals who have worked with Deaf children for YEARS and have provided such credibility and documentations is truly degrading. Barb had provided such credible information and you haven't. Yet, you have the gall to question her credibility whereas you hide yourself behind your username. This is an act of cowardice. Your behavior here is almost terroristic.
ReplyDeleteMKM, AS a Deaf person, I don't appreciate how you treat Barb's blog as it was invalid or pointless. For heaven's sake, she is a teacher and has worked with deaf children for YEARS. WORSE: you are NOT deaf; therefore, you are not qualified to put Barb down like that. I have met MANY hearies who can't write or read well but yet, they can hear and speak. Are able to speak and able to hear actually develop a language? Not from our brain? How can you dare to tell Barb that her researches and projects are meaningless to you?! She is DEAF and knows what she is talking about especially her being a teacher. That shows that your choice is not to listen us, Deaf people. My heart aches because a hearing parent of a deaf child prefers not to listen us.
ReplyDeleteMiss Kat's Mom will defend her child. THAT I can understand, but I cannot understand why she is fighting against the vast of research showing that ASL and English, together as a bilingual approach for deaf children with or without CIs are very effective. There are ways more to bring her child to the par in the language development than just Spoken English. I do wonder about her ASL skills, too. That can be a big contribution to her child's language acquisition. There are more factors to why a child's language is not up to the par. Don't blame on ASL. I stand true that ASL is the natural language for Deaf children.
ReplyDeleteSK3, you blasted Barb based on 40 years old research whilst you praised Greer's DECADES old publications. Same difference? You're not as straight as you think you are? Come on, out of closet, already.
ReplyDeleteCajunPeach, well said! It would make sense when one goes to the Dentist for teeth problems. Pharmacist for medical explanations. Landscaper for land designs. Why not Deaf Teacher for education of Deaf children?
ReplyDeleteI want to let SK3 know that I know Barb Digi on a personal level (we are practically neighbors anyway and her kids and my kids are more or less at the same age, within a year each kid.) I also have seen her at work and I have seen how she teaches. She is one of the outstanding teachers...
ReplyDeleteA few months ago one teacher had to leave so Barb was asked to take over the class which was really struggling. Within 3 months, learning from her bilingual teaching methodologies, the majority of the class passed Regents exam, which was a big feat. She has an eye for coming with solutions to make the learning environment work and has a way of firing up the students' love for learning.
I see we are more quick to judge in the cyberspace, behind the words. But meeting people in real life... ahh, it's different.
I think people are judging MKM harshly, Karen.
ReplyDeleteWhat MKM said isn't offensive. It is a fact that some deaf people write poorly, no different than it being a fact that some deaf people write excellent. It is also a fact that some deaf people write or speak (if they could) in the order of ASL grammar, no different from the fact that there are some deaf people who write in better English grammar. MKM is sharing her experience and described WHY she decided to go a different route after choosing ASL first. Heck, MKM sill loves ASL and yet many of you are treating her harshly. It's no wonder many parents stay far away from certain modalities. Why is MKM being treated this way? Geez, I am ashamed of how some of the people in my deaf community are treating hearing parents of deaf/hh children at times.
Seriously is this going to help save ASL? Really?
Where has MKM attacked En/ASL Bi-BI education? SHOW ME. The fact that her child isn't going through your preferred kind of education program doesn't mean that she is against it.
ReplyDeleteWhen will you realize that children belong to their parents and not to interest groups that have never met them?
"It would make sense when one goes to the Dentist for teeth problems. Pharmacist for medical explanations. Landscaper for land designs. Why not Deaf Teacher for education of Deaf children?"
ReplyDeleteSOOO many things wrong with this analogy. Aside from the fact that pharmacists are qualified to give prescriptions and NOT medical advice, the above vocations all derive expertise from training, not from an automatic state of being. You go to a dentist for dental problems because dentists have gone to DENTAL SCHOOL, not because they were born Dentists or participate in Dentist Culture.
One can trust Deaf educator of the Deaf (or anything, for that matter) to teach deaf kids because that educator has specialized training, not because he or she is Deaf. With the same training, even a hearing person can be qualified to teach deaf kids.