I am collecting data on the quality of education which deaf adults who were mainstreamed as children in public schools. With visible shrinkage of enrollments at the schools for the deaf across the country, it is clear that most deaf children are now mainstreamed - possibly 90% in some states.
My focus is the quality of education the said students received in the classroom. What tool of instruction did they receive? Did they have interpreters? What mode did the said interpreters use? What type of classroom were they in? Were they BTE (behind the ears hearing aids) or CI wearers? Did they speak through the interpreters or directly to their teachers? What was the interpreter's role? (did they also act as 'aides' or were they strictly messengers of information between the teachers and the students). How did they perform in the classroom?
This is strictly a confidential information so there is no need for names, where, who, etc. I realize some of you use your own names when signing in for comments, but I believe most of you use pseudonyms. I would appreciate it so much if you are willing to share information and answers the following questions below:
1. Were you mainstreamed?
2. What type of classroom were you in? (regular classroom or self-contained classroom with Special Education teacher)
3. Did you have interpreter in the classroom?
4. What kind of mode did she use? (SEE, CUED, English with a lot of fingerspelling or made-up signs, turns between signing and speaking, or anything else).
5. What role did she have in your classroom learning? (did she assist you with your assignments, tutor you, read for you by signing aloud, go to your classroom teacher to ask questions for you? Did she only exchange information between you and your teacher?).
6. What quality of information did she present? (did you understand her clearly? Did you ask her to repeat often? Did you notice her making new signs for words she didn't know signs for? Did she stop signing and started speaking when she was tired?)
7. When taking tests or given assignments, what was the average grade you received?
8. When given tests, did the interpreter assist you?
Again, these are confidential. No need for your names. I am only compiling information and using the information to form statistics.
I will do the same for deaf adults of the schools for the deaf later on.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Welcome to aslECOUTERlanguage
Ecouter is a French word for 'precious' by definition which means 'valuable.' 'Cheri' is French for precious also but its definition is 'endeared,' thus not an appropriate word to fit the meaning of my blog title. ASL is a valuable language. That is what my blog will be all about.
My career has been in teaching and am about to embark in research. My intention is using this blog for collecting information, opening discussions on various topics, and meeting people of all kinds!
I would like begin with the current controversy of a Washington State deaf girl whose hearing mother sued her deaf father in court to order this girl to continue wearing her cochlear implant during her weekend stays with her deaf father who is an ASL user. In that article, it was stated that the girl attends a public school and is mainstreamed in a regular class. She speaks well. Her grandmother said she speaks so well that she is easily passed as a hearing child. Clearly she had extensive cochlear implant therapy following the surgery to be such a successful recipient of bilateral cochlear implants.
This shows that her hearing mother invested all her energy into her cochlear implant therapy and this tells me her mother refused to be in a position to be dictated by the deaf father who allowed their daughter to retire her implants for two days on non-school days. She sees this as a setback to her implant therapy. She believes in that so firmly she was willing to go to court to enforce her belief upon the father and daughter duo.
Was the mother validated in her belief that going off the implants would delay her language acquisition? For two days, I would think not. The brain has large revesoir to store aural information processors. The mother underestimates the brain's ability to store information, both aural and visual. Her daughter would not forget or lose the language process she acquired the previous 5 days.
I would also be concerned that one implant is painful. I think the judge would do better to be more concerned about that rather than being concerned about her taking off the implants for two days while visiting her father. The judge would do better to order the mother to undergo a medical evaluation on that implant to find out why it hurts.
It is my opinion that the judge focused on the wrong thing in this case. I also suspect there were people called to the stand to testify on behalf of the mother because there is more support for cochlear implants from the hearing people than there is from the deaf community. This makes me wonder what support did the deaf father receive in his defense? Was his attorney ignorant about who he was representing? If this was the case, he harmed his client's position as well as his daughter's.
The case was already swayed in favor of the hearing mother mostly due to the general position by the society that cochlear implant is an essential tool for deaf children to process language and be a productive members of the society which means they would be speaking adults.
This case may prompt future defendants to call for support from NAD or local deaf community when a hearing family member sues to have the implant worn at all the times.
My career has been in teaching and am about to embark in research. My intention is using this blog for collecting information, opening discussions on various topics, and meeting people of all kinds!
I would like begin with the current controversy of a Washington State deaf girl whose hearing mother sued her deaf father in court to order this girl to continue wearing her cochlear implant during her weekend stays with her deaf father who is an ASL user. In that article, it was stated that the girl attends a public school and is mainstreamed in a regular class. She speaks well. Her grandmother said she speaks so well that she is easily passed as a hearing child. Clearly she had extensive cochlear implant therapy following the surgery to be such a successful recipient of bilateral cochlear implants.
This shows that her hearing mother invested all her energy into her cochlear implant therapy and this tells me her mother refused to be in a position to be dictated by the deaf father who allowed their daughter to retire her implants for two days on non-school days. She sees this as a setback to her implant therapy. She believes in that so firmly she was willing to go to court to enforce her belief upon the father and daughter duo.
Was the mother validated in her belief that going off the implants would delay her language acquisition? For two days, I would think not. The brain has large revesoir to store aural information processors. The mother underestimates the brain's ability to store information, both aural and visual. Her daughter would not forget or lose the language process she acquired the previous 5 days.
I would also be concerned that one implant is painful. I think the judge would do better to be more concerned about that rather than being concerned about her taking off the implants for two days while visiting her father. The judge would do better to order the mother to undergo a medical evaluation on that implant to find out why it hurts.
It is my opinion that the judge focused on the wrong thing in this case. I also suspect there were people called to the stand to testify on behalf of the mother because there is more support for cochlear implants from the hearing people than there is from the deaf community. This makes me wonder what support did the deaf father receive in his defense? Was his attorney ignorant about who he was representing? If this was the case, he harmed his client's position as well as his daughter's.
The case was already swayed in favor of the hearing mother mostly due to the general position by the society that cochlear implant is an essential tool for deaf children to process language and be a productive members of the society which means they would be speaking adults.
This case may prompt future defendants to call for support from NAD or local deaf community when a hearing family member sues to have the implant worn at all the times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)