Dennis.Mcclain-Furmanski.@f42.n275.z1.fidonet.org (Dennis Mcclain-Furmanski ) (06/17/91)
Index Number: 16079
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
I don't intend to disagree with anything in your post to Tim regarding
education and the deaf, but I have something just FYI concerning teaching
languages.
The U.S. government teaches english at many embassies around the world. They
recruit teachers who have *no* knowledge of the language of the country they're
going to. It is so the students are forced to deal with the teacher in english
100%. A good friend of mine was scheduled to teach in Peru but recieved his
associate professorship at Purdue. In electronic drafting of all things. Talk
about NOT knowing the language - he talked in CAD-CAM.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!275!42!Dennis.Mcclain-Furmanski.
Internet: Dennis.Mcclain-Furmanski.@f42.n275.z1.fidonet.orgJames.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org (James Womack) (06/18/91)
Index Number: 16194
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Dennis, thank you for your post about languages. the fundamnetal fact
is this. i know I have said it over and over, but Deaf people are not
hearing. Hearing people can hear English which is a phonetic language.
the Deaf can't or hear it only in muffled bits and pieces if they are
hard of hearing. Therefore, for the majority of Deaf people, you cannot
teach English or force it the way you could with a hearing person.
Consequently, with the natural method of acquisition denied, and thefact
that many Deaf people enter education without an acquired first language
to begin with, trying to teach English to the Deaf in a traditional
manner is, in most cases DOOMED TO FAILURE. The existing state of the
average deaf high school graduate whether from a mainstreaming or residential
school program is PROOF of that. Educators of the Deaf stubbornly refuse
or resist changing their methods unless it involves yet another hearizing
concept that lets them avoid making ASL the foundation upon which to
build an education for the child. They simpy refuse to acknowledge
200 plus years of dismal failure of oralism and MCE in one form or
another. Yet inthe same breath they talk aboutthe ned to test ASL first
as we don't know this or that about it. They did not test oralism before
foisting it on deaf people. They did not test SEE, L.O.V.E., Signed
English, or the Rochester Method before foisting it on Deaf people.
And they are all primarily utter failures for the simple reason that
English is phonetic and you can't take sound and make it visible. Ever
try to see a color by tasting it? Ever try to take say Spanish and
speak or write it by applying only English rules grammar? Does it make
sense to your mouth? Does it make sense to the native Spanish speaking
person? I doubt it. yet this is what so-called educators of the Deaf
have foisted on us for 200 plus years and the lament how poor our education
is. If it wasn't so tragedic it would hilarious.
Pardon me for drawing this out like this. However, i just had another
talk with an administrator where I work and she insists that her department
will require even the "totally deafened" children to take speech and
audition training. The kids inquestion have a 110+ dB loss in the best
ear. Their speech awareness thresholds are in the 100dB range and spech
discrimination is non-existent. I am told that my resistence to this
is not reasonable. Such is the state of mind with oralists and this
is in a residential school mind you. You would think this kind kin
dof things would be the exclusive baby of mnainstreaming programs,
not so. This is why we MUST have more Deaf administrators in positions
to affect policy in programs. Hearies who don't really understand deafness
(but some do perhaps more than many deaf people in soem ways) are simply
bent on "HEARIZING" and avoiding ASL as a teaching tool at all costs
even at the cost of truly educating these kids. And she insists I am
unreasonable!
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!14!James.Womack
Internet: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.orgDennis.Mcclain-Furmanski.@f42.n275.z1.fidonet.org (Dennis Mcclain-Furmanski ) (06/18/91)
Index Number: 16196
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
I didn't intend for my message concerning teaching language to counter your
posting about teaching english to the deaf. I was merely indicating that there
were examples which conflicted with the analogy you gave. Purely in the
interest of helping find an analogy that someone wouldn't poke a hole in,
should you use it against someone like the administrator you're having a
problem with. Remember, I'm the one who all but had sign language accepted as a
foreign language at Purdue (except for an unfortunate intrusion of a military
career taking me out mid-semester). The rest of the progression would have made
english as a second language available for the deaf students, and from that,
acceptance of sign as a primary language. I've been a political activist for
signers since 1983. I'd caution you that you're preaching to the choir, but
your arguments are compelling, and very good material. I intend on following
the same activities when I return to Old Dominion University this fall.
The one thing that made the recognition of sign as a complete language was the
university requirement for the second year of any langauge be taught by a
native speaker. The validity of a language was built into their own
restrictions on who may teach it. All I needed was a native signer to come and
teach. I had recommendations from several other universities that already had
done this. I had to leave before I could send out invitations for resumes.
The head of the audiology department was behind me, but being up for a
professorship, she wasn't willing to make political waves. She was a hearing
daughter of deaf parents, and sign was her first language.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!275!42!Dennis.Mcclain-Furmanski.
Internet: Dennis.Mcclain-Furmanski.@f42.n275.z1.fidonet.orgJames.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org (James Womack) (06/26/91)
Index Number: 16453
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Deniis, I hope that program youmentioned works. I have seen a lot of
well-meaning people and programs get started then flop for basic reason.
No appropriately trained Deaf people were involved in it, or in numbers
enough to prevent the usual factors that result in such programs becoming
failures. Don't take this wrong, but this is an old history inregrads
to the deaf. I hope yours is an exception and will be pulling for it
all the way. A lot of reserach is firmly establishing ASL as a language.
As for my preaching the choir, well, fact is sometimes a choir needs
a conductor who indeed does preach the musical tones, tunes, harmonizing
of the same and so on. Actually, I was not preaching. After a time
on this echo, I am beginning to honestly believe what a friend told
me some months ago when I ran into some heat here. He said, electronic
communications can make the most innocent statements seem to be the
most vile accusations. I pooh poohed him, but I think he is right afterall.
In any case, good luck with that program. It will be one of many
more in this field that is making a contribution. I hope you are in
the thick of it as I plan to be beginning this fall.
Political waves? Truth to tell, the most prgressive events in history
do not occur without waves. The Civil Rights Movement, Womens Suffrage,
the creation of the USA, ye, the decision on whether to help stop Hitler
and later Saddam Hussein, and too the struggle of Deaf People to simply
be who and what we are. People are like the sea and the sea does not
remain calm very long. This is not to say we should go about rocking
every boat in the dock. It is to say that when progress beckons, expect
resistance sooner or later. Resistance that will test your committment
to your goals and beliefs. And when this happens, people have a tendency
to either give up or they will stiffen their backbones. That's where
we get the term: AGAINST ALL ODDS. Not all of us are pushers, the genteel
people make things happen too. However, those who stiffn havetheir
places as well. They have usually learned the hard way that when they
back up they kep getting pyshed further an dfurther back. That is why
they get stiff and hardheaded. But we are all in this one together,
all the characteristics that truly "help" should be welcomed. Party
on, dude!
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!14!James.Womack
Internet: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org