I received a comment from an unknown commenter today in my blog "
Deafhood? No Thanks." A blog piece I did a few months ago. This anonymous person says that he/she is from "within their ranks" of other Deaf people and are on the "inside." Not sure if this is true, bogus, or somebody making an exaggerated claim. You decide.
Who is this guy?
Remember this one? "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers." Especially when they have some support from the Government. Deafhood is not merely a movement, it's a hideous, dangerous and counter-productive ideology. Many of the people associated with Deafhood are mere followers, they really have no idea just how destructive this movement/ideology is. This "thing" has destroyed and alterered terribly the lives of many already, usually those who cannot stand against them and succumb. Among them are young children whose parents unwittingly commit them to deaf schools where those pushing Deaf Culture and Deafhood assimilate them into "Deaf Culture" as a source of raw recruits for future members. Deaf Culture is dying, yet they're trying to revive it. These children are shut out of the usage of speech and hearing as much as they can possibly be, without raising suspicions and creating a conflict with state authorities. Deafhood has expanded it's control of state schools for the deaf and enforces it's Deaf Culture and ASL-only doctrine as the only mode of communication. I have witnessed the repudiation of "SIMCOM" or "Total Communication" where any staff member using this means faced discipline and termination. NO speech is allowed, ASL only! Turn off your voice! The parents of these childern unwittingly placed within those cultures have no idea what their child is being subjected to. The Deaf deny them that right to know, going so far as to use speech during parental visits, but speech ends as soon as the parents are gone!
State lawmakers need to investigate what is going on within government funded schools. These schools do not belong to the Deaf! These schools are publicly funded schools for all of society and have been hijacked.
I am going to stop here but will be posting more in the future. My pseudonym for this forum: Fiver. I fully expect the Deafhood "leadership" to start looking for me now, as I am within their ranks, the most dangerous threat to their plans.
I am: Fiver!
And this person raises an important question from me. Are those things really happening or have happened? Or maybe this is all a sick joke? Plus, I noticed this ominous "warning" this mystery person said: "
I am within their ranks, the most dangerous threat to their plans."
62 comments:
O....K....
Whatever. I don't buy into his story. ;-)
Mike-
Get a life...don't u have a better thing to do?
Interesting comment by Fiver.
Based on what Fiver said I do not see any reason to disbelieve him or her as a ranking insider.
I know of several ranking insiders who are keeping people informed on the work that's being done by deafhood leaders. I was not kidding anybody when I mentioned an "insider" in some of my blogs. For their own protection I am not going to elaborate on that.
It does not surprise me when this "Fiver" showed up and shared his/her thoughts on this destructive theory / movement. It's bound to happen sooner or later.
I happen to agree on numerous points raised by Fiver. I think we should get the lawmakers to investigate these matters. I propose we form a task force committee to look into the infiltration of this destructive deafhood theory / movement into State properties.
For the record I'll step up to the plate here and help this task force committee with one goal and purpose, to bring awareness to the lawmakers and call for an investigation. We, the public have as much stake in these establishments as they do so what is stopping us from raising the red flag?
During my tenure with Deaf Bilingual Coalition I saw first handed how deafhood leaders infiltrated the DBC movement and hijacked it. I got deep inside and became a core member enough to know and understand how they operated. And they gave me a could shoulder treatment when I dsiagreed. They are applying pressures on deaf teachers at these schools with expectations for them to infiltrate deafhood theory into State properties. This much is already evident and should be investigated upon.
Whether this comment by Fiver is a sick joke or not, it has already inspired me to call for an investigation by the lawmakers.
The same would be true for numerous State Universities / Colleges where numerous radical deafhood teachers teach on the subject of deaf education and ASL.
FYI, I know that there are more than one ranking Deafhood insiders who have been keeping others informed on things that are being acted upon by this deafhood leaders, in advance before it actually happens.
I was not kidding anybody when I said that I've been informed by a ranking insider about a meeting that took place with top ranking deafhood leaders where they'd meet exclusively just to talk about me and tried to explore ways to destroy me. I'm holding this damning piece of evidence for a rainy day in case something really happens to me.
I agree with Fiver on numerous points especially when he/she said "Deafhood is not merely a movement, it's a hideous, dangerous and counter-productive ideology". This is so true and precisely what I saw happening to Deaf Bilingual Coalition when it was hijacked by the ranking deafhood leaders.
And yes, this destructive theory has already infiltrated into State schools and begin to dominate the young children. It's already happening in numerous deaf schools thanks to numerous radical deaf teachers / staff who carried specific tasks onto State properties. We, the public have every rights to call for an investigation by the lawmakers.
Haha, I don't think deafhood have anything to hide so it is impossible to be the "inside". They are what they are. Nothing secretive about it.
anony 6:30 AM:
I'm reporting this comment. I am not sure what to make of it.
The plot is thickening. :-)
Just for curiosity, I looked up "fiver". One of the meanings is clenched fist that would symbolize the power to crush something. Or, it could be related to fifth column.
Regardless, I would not give much weight to what the anonymous person wrote until something more concrete happens.
I have read several instances where turn-off voice in the bilingual approach is strictly enforced in order to keep ASL pure and separate from the spoken English language. Whether this is true, I do not know.
Joseph Pietro Riolo
josephpietrojeungriolo@gmail.com
Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.
This definitely is an exaggeration to the point of outright falsehood. I don't know of ANY school that prohibits voice or speech training altogether.
The tone of Fiver's statements is grossly paranoid and smacks of Chicken Little worldwide destruction thinking. Whoever it is, is a certifiable crank. Anyone who believes it needs his head examined.
Mike,
Rent the movie "V for Vendetta" and that's where the word "fiver" came from.
The movie was about the struggles against ideologies and totalitarian government.
Fiver is the fifth letter from the end of the alphabet which is a V.
Just thought I share this with you all
:)
Ecnarb
Dianrez,
Per your request I'll have my head examined. LOL.
Meanwhile I think those who don't believe what Fiver is saying need to have their eyes examined. They don't seem to see what's quite obvious. A classic case of refusing to believe what they don't want to believe.
Oh well.
"Fiver"-Who is this guy?
Barry, or Russell, or Richard or Candy, or White Ghost, or YOU (Mike)!
A threat to Deaf culture??
We have been threat for over 100 years, and we survivor.
What "Fiver" wrote a fake story.
some of what Fiver says is true. for example, the deaf school I work for uses ASL exclusively without voice. teachers are not fired for using voice, though, just strongly discouraged from doing it. this same school does offer speech instruction to students who can benefit from it. and sometimes to those who don't, because their parents insist on it. the school has a good number of DHers, but to their credit, they keep DH politics pretty much out of the business of the school. once in a while there will be an email sent to the entire campus about something related to DH. usually by the same people. we had 1 workshop about DH, that's it. nothing I haven't heard before. when something comes up that I consider to be overly political and especially aimed at our younger students, I let my supervisor know, who handles it in-house. My supervisor has seen Ella's and Dr DonG's vlogs and is outraged by them so an administrator knows some of the more egregious examples of DHers.
sure would be interesting to see whether Fiver can give us some examples of his or her inside knowledge. so far, my impression is that most DHers are just a lot of hot air and not much influence on anyone except themselves. I don't see them as having the ability for positive and productive system change. they're way too hostile and, yes, extreme to be able to convince anyone in a position of influence to support their cause.
Anonymous 456
anony 10:34 AM,
No, it wasn't me. Sorry. As for others, I can't say. They have to come in here and say so but I don't believe it's them anyway. It's about an "insider," someone already close and intimate with the DHers. Though I can't even vouch whether if this is true or not. But the point is, he/she raised some interesting questions.
Dianrez...
Not so fast. "You don't think" doesn't mean it didn't happen.
It would not surprise me and that is based on many messages by certain deafhood members. They are constantly changing and explaining what they are saying because they know they have to be careful.
Because of people with views that clashes with theirs, they say things to pacify us. Look at the messages in the beginning and look how they have changed somewhat.
They thought that deaf would support deaf. For example, they probably thought that we all argue about issues, we discuss, we agree to disagree, still not on the same page, YET, when it comes to going out in public for show of support, they expect us on their side. That's not how it works. And, they don't understand that.
I'm saying if it has indeed happened, I wouldn't be surprised.
Look at the AB2072 situation, they made a big thing about ASL and language when they forgot that oralism does work for some and that one can get full language acquisition by spoken and written English.
Anyone can send a letter to the state and express concerns, asking the state to investigate to quell the rumors that has been going on. Maybe they will investigate, maybe not.
Eventually, if it is the truth, it will come out in good time.
Ecnarb,
Thanks! I didn't know that.
Someone has a vendetta? "Fiver"?
Anonymous 456 validated that some of what Fiver says is true.
Anymore brave souls willing to come forward and validate Fiver and Anonymous 456??
;)
I'm using anonymous since it's faster to post.
I think it is a crank and agree with Dianez. My daughter
went to a Bi/Bi Deaf School. The philosophy was to respect
ASL and English and Deaf culture and hearing culture equally. Not trying to speak in two languages at the same time makes sense in an educational environment.
It works and the results were amazing. My daughter, from our hearing family, passed all her states tests on the first try. That is a feat many hearing students don't achieve.
Also what about the oral schools? Ok for them to forbid sign language?
On a different note, a comment to Barry.,. Is there a reason why you can't stick to the topic and why regardless of the topic you go right to harassing DBC and Deafhood along with adding threats to blackmail people? Haven't you been reading Mike and Candy's posts on cyberbullying? When can a truse fire be made?
Some of what "Fiver" says might be true - no voice in a classroom where ASL is used. That most likely does happen in the large residential schools. That's part of the Bi-Bi philosophy. A time and place where to use ASL and when to use your voice. Otherwise, the student won't be able to acquire ASL and speech skills as well as s/he should.
But this guy is making it sound like these school is violating the children's IEP by not providing speech therapy, and indoctrinating them with ideas about Deafhood.
And this is what I don't buy. It sounds like a paranoid conspiracy theory, and I've had enough experience, along with knowing many advocates who have dealt with the schools, to know the schools just simply aren't competent enough to pull off this kind of thing without tipping their hand to the parents.
This would require a massive coordination on all levels to impeccably falsify documents, including IEP documents, and grade reports. Not only that, but don't you think if the child had sufficient written English skills, or if the parents knew ASL, the child would tell their parents what was going on? "Yay! No speech therapy!"
It just doesn't work. I repeat - the schools are NOT competent enough to pull this off.
This wild-eyed statement from "Fiver" strikes me as someone who's trying to rile up the DH people, because he's bored and he wants to see more dissension in their ranks.
The thing is, the extreme DH movement is already disintegrating, because it's just not sustainable enough. We're already seeing very public splits among them. So why bother doing this? It's not gonna help matters.
I may be entirely wrong, but I am inclined to think that the comment may have been epistled by one of the audiologists who are affiliated with California Academy of Auidology (CAA) who initially worked on AB 2072 with Assemblyman Tony Mendoza.
Anonymous 11:15
You are sore because I want to talk about DBC and deafhood? Is it because you see me as a leading crusader against them? If so, tough break.
Threats? Blackmails? Who did I threaten or blackmail in my comments in this thread? If the deafhoodized people feel threatened by my presence or the comment I just made in this thread then perhaps there is a good reason why they're worried.
The subject here is 'infiltration of deafhood theory' into the State Schools and State properties. If these radical deaf teachers / staff do not understand code of ethics and 'conflict of interest' then they surely better learn about it soon.
A call for lawmaker's investigation on infiltration of deafhood into State schools and State properties is a form of cyberbullying? You ought to have your head examined as well.
Yikes I am a little nervous to comment. So my son was at a state school until 6th grade. It was a voice off program with pull out speech for those who needed It.
I agree with A Deaf Pundit. From what I saw the schools could never pull it off. They are so nervous about parents freaking out. I saw first hand how heated the debate gets at board meetings when someone brings up an ASL policy. Also there is SO much government red tape they can barely make a move in any direction.
My son is now mainstreamed and the only thing i noticed is he had to learn how to socialize with hearing people. Not a big deal, subtle stuff. He passes his state tests and is doing great.
So I don't know a lot about DH but it looks a little paranoid to think the schools are that motivated to indoctrinate the families especially when they are drastically cutting budgets. 10% in our school's case. They have their hands full. From what I understand the teachers unions wouldn't allow teachers to be fired. Their isn't even a language guideline to act on.
Maybe I am not understanding the issue. I had no idea this was a concern. I don't know a lot about this but this is how it looks from my perspective as a parent.
Anonymous 10:34
Sorry. Was not me. This is news to me.
Coming from a big deaf family along with the "seventh generation of deafness" label I have never heard any of my family mention the word, threatened. None of us felt threatened for the past 100 years. Thus, there was never any need to call ourselves survivors. We lived comfortably and happily because we knew how to thrive in this world. We co-existed beautifully.
didn't cy, a teacher of the deaf brag about her oral deaf students being socially rejected by her ASL signing students in a blog a couple of years ago?
a deaf pundit would know about this. so would deaf.read. editors.
the fact the blog posting is gone speaks volumes about the shameful conduct of many teachers of the deaf who follow deaf.hood.
Maybe what Fiver is referring to only happens in one state school, the Bay Area.
I know there have been at least one instance where IEP is not followed as far as communication/language preference because a staff member has his/her own opinion. I can't elaorate on this yet. But, if there is one instance where I know it has happened, then to say that it is impossible would be erroneous.
BTW, I am out in the Midwest and have no way of being a mole inside DH. ;)
Fiver report true. What he report happen to one bi/bi program, starting IEPs themselves with parents being discouraged by staff from asking pull-out speech therapy for their children. Staff tell parents speech therapy no good, no help deaf kids, waste time. Nothing new. it like that five years min. That same school give Deafhood workshops students on campus, too. Supt wink, permitted. Supt take Deafhood classes
Paranoia? I wish. I learn first from insiders of one bi bi school four year ago. First my reaction not believe. Me think too far fetched. But, after I get know the Deafhood people, I find the insiders tell truth. I not believe happening in all bi-bi school, but yes with one school, me no name the school. Others not believe need open eyes and look deep. Insiders fear speak out. If speak out, lose jobs.
In bi-bi programs, children aren't allow use their voices in classroom. True. Three schools I know use this.
Nameless due to cyber bully
I agree with haddy2dogs and DeafPundit. It would be impossible for state schools for the deaf to get away with this. Most state schools I have worked in and come across have hearing teachers speaking and signing at the same time. For some reason, not many deaf native signers are signing up to be teachers in these schools.
I can see the need for the voice off policy during ASL use at Bi-Bi programs. It would be necessary when they want to focus on one language at a time.
(e
Coming from a big deaf family along with the "seventh generation of deafness" label I have never heard any of my family mention the word, threatened. None of us felt threatened for the past 100 years. Thus, there was never any need to call ourselves survivors. We lived comfortably and happily because we knew how to thrive in this world. We co-existed beautifully.
Barry, this is a fairy tale story.
I have been very involved in Deaf Education at
as a parent advocate. The bilingual/bicultural philosophy typical uses this methodology. The primary language of
instruction is ASL. English is learned as a second language through reading, writing, and speaking (speaking
for those who have this listed as part of their IEP). Deaf culture/history/the arts are also a part of Deaf schools. Students compare and contrast Hearing Culture and Deaf Culture. I see this as very positive. In mainstream schools or oral schools, the opportunity to learn about Deaf
or study the grammar of ASL is practically non-existent.
IDEA requires a "continuum of educational options" which includes Schools for the Deaf that use sign language as the means of instruction.
Deafhood can be seen as a positive thing just like any search for the depth of our souls and a search for where we as people find our own personal identities. Some may not feel the need to seek this and others may. That is the
beauty of a free world. I have never seen this "Deafhood"
study mandated by Deaf Schools. If employees of schools study Deafhood, that is their business. Just as religion is there business.
I think Five is just another angry soul finding the negatives rather than seeing the positives.
On a side not again...Barry.... Your statements below are
bullying, harassing, and threatening You obviously are seeking a reaction. I
"You are sore because I want to talk about DBC and deafhood? Is it because you see me as a leading crusader against them? If so, tough break.
Threats? Blackmails? Who did I threaten or blackmail in my comments in this thread? If the deafhoodized people feel threatened by my presence or the comment I just made in this thread then perhaps there is a good reason You are sore because I want to talk about DBC and deafhood? Is it because you see me as a leading crusader against them? If so, tough break.
Threats? Blackmails? Who did I threaten or blackmail in my comments in this thread? If the deafhoodized people feel threatened by my presence or the comment I just made in this thread then perhaps there is a good reason why they're worried.why they're worried."
In regards to blackmail, please see your own comment
above where you mention holding "evidence" to use against others in case they seek to do something against use. (Sorry this is not verbatim but I couldn't copy and paste from my iPhone).
Barry, I hope that one day you will see that no one
wishes you harm nor do others wish to be harmed as well.
Let's keep dialogue healthy rather than used it as a mechanism to provoke others.
Candy,
There might be instances of an individual or even several individuals violating students' IEPs. That happens all the time in all school systems, (particularly in public schools with zero deaf employees, I might add. :P)
But what "Fiver" is talking about is a systematic violation of MANY students' IEPs. And that is just not believable. This would require a conspiracy on such a massive scale that it's just not feasible. Word would get out to the parents, way before it would hit the blogs.
Then when you consider that all residential schools have hearing employees... Do you honestly think the hearing employees would stand for this? :p
Puhleeze.
Deaf Pundit...
No, I don't think hearing employees will stand for it. I have no idea how it is out in CSDR. Do you? I have heard things, but then they're not reliable cuz it's hearsay.
I guess time will tell if Fiver is right or not, until then, I will neither dismiss it nor believe it completely.
Also, one thing to keep in mind, Fiver said "State schools for the deaf", indcating more than one. He or she could be assuming it based on what is already happening in one state school and the plan that dh has.
Hot bed of deafhood is in the Bay Area, CSDR is in the Bay Area. There has been word by a few who lives there indicating that they have to be careful what they say and do in the deaf community.
I personally believe that if what Fiver says is true, then it is what he knows of in the Bay Area. Secondly, he may know of dh's plan to influence other deaf staff members of other deaf schools.
I doubt it is happening in other deaf schools nor is it happening in mainstream programs. Impossible, for the same thing that Deaf Pundit thinks. But, I'm not too sure about CSDR, tho.
Not enough evidence to dismiss it and not enough evidence to take it seriously. But, something to keep an eye out on.
I may be repeating here, but wanted to clarify on why I'm not dismissing it outrightly and my thoughts are not on other state schools for the deaf, nor mainstream programs, but rather, the one in the Bay Area.
Hmmm... I was out with my daughter this afternoon...
I can say for sure that Indiana School for the Deaf uses "voice off" policy with pull-outs for speech therapy only (20 minutes 2x a week at maximum... not minimum.) My kids were scolded for using their voices, and my daughter was sent to the detention twice for using her voice. Opposite of oral deaf schools, as you'd say. So they went mainstreaming, to meet their communication needs, since they liked using their voices. Now, they are back at the bilingual Deaf school, in a different state now, yes, and so far it's not a totally 100% "DEAF" school, so it is good for now.
It's just a matter of finding a time for using voice... and using ASL. If the state deaf residential schools want to up the enrollment, then they'd have to be able to meet the needs of deaf children who LIKE using their voices... which is not easy.
Thank you, Karen. Meaning your kids were punished for using his/her voice instead of no voice with ASL?
Punishment?? What were those punishments be?
I met a girl last spring who just finished high school
in a mainstream public school. She told me that everytime
she was caught signing, she was sent to the principal's office. She was tormented by this act and angry at the school and her parents for putting her through this.
In a bilingual Deaf school if children talk in class, they leave out
the majority of the class and the teacher, It makes communication difficult. That is why it is important to teach
students how to show respect for each other. it really has nothing to do with being "100%" Deaf. It is about knowing the the time and place for using spoken English. In front
of peers who use ASL, that is not appropriate because
they can't access what is being spoken and hence are left out
For Deaf
One school where many deafhood people work. Deaf staff bully deaf staff, bully hearing staff. Insider tell me CODA supt know, play dumb. He freindly deafhood people.
School use Ella deafhood. Deafhood positve deaf people, DBC, AFA good. Hearing people bad, avdism, colonalsm, oppresors, hear bad, talk bad, oralsm bad, cohear implant bad.
Insiders shares stories many private. They afriad, not share public.
Candy,
CSDR is CSD Riverside, which is located in Los Angeles. The one in the Bay Area is CSDF (Fremont).
*SIGH*…
Come on. There is no conspiracy going on. This Fiver is paranoid. Please apply some critical thinking here. Dianrez is correct, and Deafpundit is also correct. So is Haddydogs. I agree with Karen Mayes. I don't buy this story.
Of course Bi-Bi programs practice voice-off when using ASL!
The simple reason for this has absolutely NOTHING to do with Deafhood. The real reason is that ASL is a language with DISTINCT linguistic features. It has nonmanual grammatical signals and markers. Any one who has studied ASL linguistics would know it is impossible to use ASL accurately, OR English accurately when sim-comming.
You're combining two languages in a way that violates the grammatical structures and features of BOTH languages.
As I stated above, the nonmanual grammatical signals and markers include body and head shifts (those are nonmanual grammatical signals) as well as shifts of eyebrows, narrowing or widening of eyes, and various pursing of the lips, puffing or sucking of the cheeks (those are nonmanual grammatical markers. The eyebrow movements indicate the type of ASL sentences—yes/no questions, wh-questions, topicalization…which are the ASL version of what you know as punctuation. The lip movement and puffing/sucking in of cheeks are adverbs and adjectives). Therefore, to correctly model ASL, you CANNOT voice because that requires lip movements that renders impossible the modeling of adjectives and adverbs in ASL.
Simcomming would also adversely affect the modeling of spoken English. If one simply taped the voicing of English while using ASL at the same time, and then later listened to that tape. This experiment was attempted, and I’m told that the result was that the speaker sounded like a veritable idiot. Try this and see.
It is really as SIMPLE as that!
If the above explanation is not clear, try this explanation to help you understand bilingual-bicultural programs.
No French Immersion programs here in Canada require that you communicate using both English and French simultaneously. That is a sheer impossibility. No hearing bilingual schools would encourage this. So why should this continue to be required in Deaf schools????
Conspiracy, my foot!
Shel
Well, the classroom's main language was ASL, so meaning voice off. My kids used their voices out of habit. So they ended up being sent to the supervising teacher's office (no recess... especially for my daughter, since the teacher felt she was doing it on purpose, so I don't know.) That was two/three years ago... I don't know about now.
Karen, you said "my daughter was sent to the detention twice for using her voice."
I'm appalled. What on earth is the point of punishing a Deaf kid for using her voice? What good does it do? Isn't simply ignoring it the thing to do while focusing on the education, ASL or English?
This is not what a good school for the deaf should be doing. Bi-bi education teaches respect for both cultures and both languages, and mixing the two on occasion isn't the end of the world.
Deaf Pundit..
Thank you for pointing out my error....what I meant was CSDF in Fremont.
So, for every CSDR I typed, should read CSDF.
Actually, I'd not mind for my kids to be told to use ASL. But for kindergarten and 1st grade kids... being sent to detention for using voice... I disagree with it...that's what happened to my daughter.
Well, it's over. The challenge is of course how to meet the deaf children who have aptitude to talk and listen... we can't leave them behind in deaf education. Often the solution would be mainstreaming them, which shows that deaf education needs to develop resources to meet their needs.
All right... take care.
Oh man, this is sooooo wrong! If a child has a voice, he/she should use it! There are many hard of hearing kids out there, let them use their voice!
So, is this Bilingual approach? Dianrez seem to indicate that it should not be, but she isn't clear as to whether that is a bilingual approach or not. Oh, wait a min..I was told there is a difference betweent bi-bi and bilingual. Bi-bi allows voice whereas bilingual does not? Enlighten me.
Dianrez, I was told that Bi-Bi allowed voice off while bilingual allows the usage of voice. Rochester School for the Deaf uses a bilingual method... and it's not "Bi Bi" school, from what Barb Digi told me (and you and a few others at one lunch two months ago, if I remember correctly.)
Will check on this blog tomorrow AM... ta da.
I am not saying that Deafhood is a dangerous ideology, but any ideology has the potential to affect widespread systematic changes overnight. Just look at how Nazi Germany occurred overnight. Nobody should disregard any form of ideology as harmless, that would be foolish.
That being said, I agree that 'Fiver' is a bit paranoid. Deafhood is not a bad thing if you ask me, it's misunderstood or rather "self defined" by each individual. So, if there are systematic changes they will be driven by collective thinking. As long as there is a healthy mix of opposing views, it's all good.
at my state school, that uses ASL exclusively for instruction with voice off, there are a surprising number of hard of hearing students who can communicate clearly by speaking and listening, in addition to signing. to my knowledge, they don't get detention simply for using voices in class - only when it's done to exclude or disrupt the class. a couple years ago there was a hard of hearing girl who liked to shriek and make a lot of noise as every opportunity, just because she could, and she had peers who could hear her and scream back. thank God she didn't stay too long. I guess she got tired of all those detentions.
Anonymous 456
This is new to me. I never had "voice off" in my deaf school. The ones that could talk was allowed to.
One day kids will talk about the "bad experiences" at a deaf school for not being allowed to talk in class, just like the olden days, they were not allowed to sign at an oral school. What is it called? Axdism? Will there be a new word for those who oppress those who want to speak?
This is too weird for me.
Candy,
That has nothing to do with audism. It has to do with modeling both languages correctly in different contexts.
Bilingual means using TWO different languages in different contexts.
BI-Bi is Bilingual-bicultural philosophy or approach that encourages the use of two languages and respects both cultures that are connected to both languages. It could be English and French, Spanish and English, French and Spanish, ad nauseam...and that includes English and ASL; French and LSQ.
VOICE-ON while signing is Simultaneous Communication, which is a methodology to teach Deaf children English. That CANNOT be called a language, and has absolutely nothing to do with bilinguality. Simcom, as I said above, mangles BOTH languages as a result.
Hope that clears things up.
Shel
I do not have any doubts that we're going to hear some more from those so-called deafhood dissents in the future. It's only a matter of time before they are going to come out and expose the ultimate truth behind these radical / extremist theory.
I'm seriously looking into the possibility of putting together a task force committee with one specific goal. To compose testimonies and detailed history / background on deafhood and request for an investigation into the infiltrations of radical deafhood movement / theory into State funded Schools as well as State properties. And that's all I'm going to say here.
And no, this is not a form of cyberbullying. It's not bullying to ask the State to investigate into this matter and find out why these State schools and programs are beginning to tolerate and even enforce the destructive theory and allowing them to infiltrate into State funded programs.
They are already required by law to maintain neutrality status within the confines of their State programs. We, the tax-payers have an obligation to make sure they remain that way.
Fiver, if you're reading this you know where to find me. That's if you're for real.
What irks me is this -- back in the old days, kids would have their hands slapped by a ruler for signing in the oral programme.
however, -now- they're being sent to detention because they used their voice in the class room?
Talk about double standard. Totally f--ked up.
Bi-Bi approach/philosophy began YEARS before Deafhood was even a word, YEARS before Paddy wrote his book.
BI-BI has absolutely nothing to do with Deafhood.
It is an approach that teaches respect for both languages and cultures. It doesn't even have to be ASL-ENGLISH only. It could be English-French or English-Spanish, or even French-Spanish, to give a few examples.
Back to BIBI approach/philosophy, it promotes bilinguality- which is the use of both languages, each in different contexts and situations.
As for voice-off, please see my explanation of ASL grammar a few comments back.
It has nothing to do with Deafhood.
Now, to address other commenters' concerns about punitive measures used against voicing. I agree that punitive measures shouldn't be used.
What should be done is teach respect for others, and to teach why ASL shouldn't be voiced (simple reason: it cancels out nonmanual grammar signals/markers that is an integral part of ASL. I know I'm repeating myself here. But... NMS/NMM are to ASL what punctuations, adjectives and adverbs are to English.)
What should be done is to model, and ENCOURAGE voice off since there are Deaf people around who use ASL. Also make sure BiBI programs offer ASL Language Arts where children study ASL just like they study English during English Language Arts.
Once people understand the principles of both English and ASL, they will understand the voice-off policy better, and adhere to it. Punitive measures, I repeat, are unnecessary. Reminders are often needed for sure, to undo years of habitual Sim-comming.
Shel...
Excuse me.
What do you call individuals punishing kids for using ASL? Answer this one for me please.
Right now I'm not even talking about deafhood here. I'm talking about prohibiting a child to use his/her voice in a bilingual setting.
Oh man, I'd rebel big time.
Talk about F*cked up deaf education all these years, this one is the biggest F*ck up ever.
Every child's needs are different and in that regard, perhaps they should divide these classes based on that.
Let's get something clarified here shall we?
Bilingual-Bicultural is that diffrent from Blingual alone?
Bi-Bi vs Bilingual= same or different?
I want to clarify that because I'm not finding it much different when doing my search online.
Thank you.
my attention span is too short to cite the source, but it's true that administrators have tried to meddle in the speech teachers' business about who get to have speech and who does not. if it was up to them, NO student would get speech at all, period. I'm sure of it. They'd rather that those students with speech spend their time in the classroom getting instruction on course content, or getting ASL instruction if they don't sign so well. Nothing wrong with that. I'm ascribing good intentions to them. Fortunately both the students and their parents value their speech time and are not swayed by the administrators' persistence on dropping speech.
ASL/English bilingualism is a little different from the standard model of bilingalism practiced by hearing students whose first language is not English. with ASL bi-bi, the goal is to use ASL without voice for instruction, use ASL to teach English literacy (reading and writing), and pull-out speech instruction on the IEP or students who benefit from it. Use of voice is discouraged because, as Shel pointed out, it detracts from the clarity of ASL on part of the teacher, and excludes deaf students who cannot hear speech from full access to instruction. ASL is used throughout the student's educational career instead of being replaced by spoken English, as is the case in bilingual spoken language programs.
A program that uses both spoken English and ASL would be called a bi-MODAL program, since both languages are used separately instead of simultaneously.
Anyway, to get back to Fiver's allegations, as someone who works in an educational setting with lots of Deafhood adherents, some extreme but most moderate, be assured that someone is keeping a close eye on the situation. I don't have anything to do with DH so I can't claim to be the insider spy that Fiver says s/he is. :)
Anonymous 456
Teachers punishing kids for using ASL are called oralists. On the other hand, teachers punishing kids for using voice should explain what the hell they are doing and why.
If they are teaching ASL fluency, gently reminding kids that voice on isn't part of ASL and to save it for another part of the day is more reasonable.
Punishing might have been for some other reason, such as the child using voice in a disruptive, exclusionary or disobedient way, but in today's educational philosophy would better be ignored (given no reinforcement either way.)
Separating kids according to speech ability can be counterproductive in today's small enrollments. Brighter kids might end up grouped with slower progressing kids, or HOH kids separated from the ASL kids. No way. We have enough oral divide problems already.
Pull-outs are used to address individual needs.
OOps. Candy, Anonymous 9:58 comment which is just above your comment questioning me... is mine. I didn't realize that I forgot to put my name there. That particular comment should answer your question.
Shel
There's still one question that hasn't been answered.
Is there a difference between "Bi-Bi" and "Bilingual" when it comes to deaf education.
Different? or are they both the same?
Ok. Candy, I made a post dealing with Bi-Bi and bilingual today. Here's the link:
http://www.deafcanadian.com/2010/10/10/asl-myth-debunking-time-again/
Hope this helps to answer your question. I'm not sure how to make this link go directly to my blog. You may have to cut and paste.
Shel
How much speech training did Cobi get?
It's clear that Barry doesn't mind that Cobi does not speak.
The plot thickens! Barry is part of the ASL-only, don't learn to speak cult!
Fiver-plus-change
anony 4:24 PM.
It's a parental decision. Parents make their own informed decision on how to raise their deaf or hh child on communication choices. I'm not complaining but you are? You're not the parents, they are. You do not get to decide. They do. Understand?
Keep short-changing yourself.
DH profiling (not deaf enough) is the infectious administrative disease infiltrating state schools for the deaf...as someone put it, our deaf youth are RAW recruits for this DH ideology.
Parents...caveat!
Think...Learn...
Interestingly, a number of readers posted their own experiences or views that seemingly reinforced a number of my own. These are independent and largely anonymous voices that lend validity to some of my assertions. Of course, there are always the naysayers.
Shel has been the most vociferous with her attempts to rationalize these methods that are oppressive to those children with residual hearing and speech that can be developed. The “bi-bi” approach, or rather “movement” is operating under the guise of “teaching language and culture.” This implies that ASL and Deaf culture are only incidental to the teaching, when in fact, those concepts are the main goal. Auditory methods and speech articulation are suppressed under the rationale that it is necessary in order for these children to “assimilate” ASL to proficiency. There are many fallacies regarding this assumption. But just bear in mind that these people are profoundly affecting the lives of these children by altering the primary language to ASL and by exposure to a culture that has not been defined.
There is no theory or empirical evidence that ASL is a “bridge” to English language learning, even though this very premise has been claimed by many renowned (unnamed) educators of the deaf. In the past these advocates for “bi-bi,” ASL, etc. have alluded to, or insinuated that such a thing exists. But when pressed, they admit that there is no evidence. This has not stopped them, however. They are fervently working to manufacture “studies” and seeking out established language experts to validate their methods, by claiming parallels about how hearing persons learn foreign language. It is not the same! Learners of a second language have already acquired their primary language!
The goal of our schools, whether they are public schools for the hearing or public (state schools) for the deaf, the majority of states require that English must be taught as L1 (English=First Language). This is not happening in deaf schools where ASL is being taught as L1 (ASL=First Language). In such cases, this is clear violation of state law. Children must be taught English in order to function and be economically viable in the world, once they leave the school. I suppose, I do not know, but suppose, that they will rationalize their actions by saying that deaf require a visual language in order to communicate. All that they are doing is engraining these children into a language that is little known or used outside of deaf circles.
The minds of young children are “in the process” of being wired in early childhood. Although much of this “wiring” occurs in the first 2-3 years, it continues for many years after this “ideal window” for language development. Once a child is “wired” for a language of a certain type, that mode becomes life-long and unlikely to change. Proponents of the “bi-bi” movement know this, and are pressing forward with this misguided approach that will create a whole new generation of deaf individuals bereft of English language skills, recognizable speech, and enculturation into an extremely small minority “society” that has historically, and likely to remain a social and economic under-class in perpetuity.
I shall stop now. May I ask those whom seem more interested in speculation about my identify and the desire to "defrock" me before the Deaf establishment that will cause the hammer to come down, please be so kind to simply focus on the message. I understand that you probably can't but then its sufficient evidence that what I am saying must grate at your sensitivities, perhaps even create a bit of paranoia?
I am Fiver!
Interestingly, a number of readers posted their own experiences or views that seemingly reinforced a number of my own. These are independent and largely anonymous voices that lend validity to some of my assertions. Of course, there are always the naysayers.
Shel has been the most vociferous with her attempts to rationalize these methods that are oppressive to those children with residual hearing and speech that can be developed. The “bi-bi” approach, or rather “movement” is operating under the guise of “teaching language and culture.” This implies that ASL and Deaf culture are only incidental to the teaching, when in fact, those concepts are the main goal. Auditory methods and speech articulation are suppressed under the rationale that it is necessary in order for these children to “assimilate” ASL to proficiency. There are many fallacies regarding this assumption. But just bear in mind that these people are profoundly affecting the lives of these children by altering the primary language to ASL and by exposure to a culture that has not been defined.
There is no theory or empirical evidence that ASL is a “bridge” to English language learning, even though this very premise has been claimed by many renowned (unnamed) educators of the deaf. In the past these advocates for “bi-bi,” ASL, etc. have alluded to, or insinuated that such a thing exists. But when pressed, they admit that there is no evidence. This has not stopped them, however. They are fervently working to manufacture “studies” and seeking out established language experts to validate their methods, by claiming parallels about how hearing persons learn foreign language. It is not the same! Learners of a second language have already acquired their primary language!
The goal of our schools, whether they are public schools for the hearing or public (state schools) for the deaf, the majority of states require that English must be taught as L1 (English=First Language). This is not happening in deaf schools where ASL is being taught as L1 (ASL=First Language). In such cases, this is clear violation of state law. Children must be taught English in order to function and be economically viable in the world, once they leave the school. I suppose, I do not know, but suppose, that they will rationalize their actions by saying that deaf require a visual language in order to communicate. All that they are doing is engraining these children into a language that is little known or used outside of deaf circles.
The minds of young children are “in the process” of being wired in early childhood. Although much of this “wiring” occurs in the first 2-3 years, it continues for many years after this “ideal window” for language development. Once a child is “wired” for a language of a certain type, that mode becomes life-long and unlikely to change. Proponents of the “bi-bi” movement know this, and are pressing forward with this misguided approach that will create a whole new generation of deaf individuals bereft of English language skills, recognizable speech, and enculturation into an extremely small minority “society” that has historically, and likely to remain a social and economic under-class in perpetuity.
I shall stop now. May I ask those whom seem more interested in speculation about my identify and the desire to "defrock" me before the Deaf establishment that will cause the hammer to come down, please be so kind to simply focus on the message. I understand that you probably can't but then its sufficient evidence that what I am saying must grate at your sensitivities, perhaps even create a bit of paranoia?
I am Fiver!
Post a Comment