The next deaf/hh person to speak/voice at Gallaudet University?

I wondered just recently, how many deaf or hard of hearing people at Gallaudet University actually used their voice to speak to an audience along with interpreters on the campus of Gallaudet University? Students, alumni, guest speakers, or even one from the Gallaudet University administration? I can think of  four people who have done that and I'm sure there were more Deaf, deaf or hard of hearing people who did use their voice instead of signing.

The first one come to mind which is the most famous in the lore of Gallaudet University is Dr. Brueggemann who used her voice at Gallaudet University's graduation ceremony.  She was a last minute replacement for Celia May Baldwin after she resigned from her position because of threats against her by some nutty pro-DPN2 protesters. She was wrongfully scorned for her actions because people simply did not know the true story of why she spoke instead of signed at the May 12, 2006 graduation ceremony.

And had I had any time to actually prepare my remarks for the GU graduation last May, I probably would have signed them more or at least part of them. But I didn't have that prep time. I was dropped into the Acting Chair's position on May 10, to be exact--once CM Baldwin resigned. And I was handed the remarks she was supposed to deliver (already scripted) for graduation on May 12. In fact, they didn't even give me the script until the morning of May 12. And it still had her name at the top of it! So, using oral/spoken English, I could feel comfortable enough to develop a few of my own "touches" in the prepared script. But I sure couldn't do that trying to use ASL....

Dr. Brueggemann received hell for using her voice at Gallaudet University, mostly from bloggers and those who contributed to the discussion about her. You can watch her commencement speech video starting at 45:15.

Next is Michael Chorost, a well known cochlear implantee born with a hearing loss, who spoke at Gallaudet University in March 21, 2007 yet no outrage for this guy although he did sign his introductory name.

View externally


Next is another (unknown) person named "Bobby W." who claimed to have used his voice in 2006 to defend his student teaching experience for his degree at Gallaudet University:

If it makes you feel any better at the height of the campus scandal in 2006 while I was defending my student teaching experience for my degree from Gallaudet in front of the Education Department. I also choose to use my voice to do so. I used ASL for the answering/question session but the actual defense I used my voice. Imagine defending an education degree from Gallaudet University orally. Im sure I was the FIRST to ever do so.


I received a few funny looks from my peers and a few of the EDU professors but It was a success...


-Bobby W.

And then, of course, myself when I used my voice while I was one of the several panel members at Gallaudet University's first ever vlogging/blogging conference in 2007 that was televised live in front of an internet audience and the audience that were physically present. Most people, I think, were quite receptive of my decision to use my voice compared to Dr. Brueggemann.

In a space of about a year from 2006 to 2007 four different people who are deaf or hard of hearing used their voice in front of an audience on the campus of Gallaudet University as far as I know. Could it be a start of a trend?  I'm sure there may have been a few more examples of that since then so does anybody know other deaf/hh people who did use their voice in front of an audience on the campus of Gallaudet University? And if so, how did people respond? Looking back, why did people respond differently to each of those four different people I just mentioned? Will the future see more people deciding to use their voice instead of signing as a choice?

UPDATE: I came across another individual ( a 1975 Gallaudet University alumnus) who did an oral defense at Alliant International University (and not at Gallaudet) as described in Gallaudet University's alumni news page. But note the irony on the study of the defense was about:

'75 - Joe McLaughlin passed the oral defense for his doctoral dissertation, "Sign Language Interpreter Shortage in California: Perceptions of Stakeholders," at Alliant International University in San Francisco, Calif. in January. McLaughlin received his Ed.D. degree in higher education in June.

Racial and Ethnic Spew Against Gallaudet University President Hurwitz, why?

When a person makes an ethnic or racial slur/claim against Gallaudet University by calling the current Hurwitz administration as being run by an "all Jewish, white men" is not only irresponsible but certainly downright conspiratorial in nature as well as obnoxious. It's even worse if it came from a person who graduated from Gallaudet University. This is a slam against Dr. Hurwitz who  became the first Jewish president of Gallaudet University and was also a past president of the World Organization of Jewish Deaf. Is it a slam against the rest of the Gallaudet University administration by making it as if the university is controlled by a bunch of "Jewish men"? It certainly does bring up questions of whether there were any racist and/or anti-semitic undertones. Although it may have been written as not to mean that but to say "all Jewish, white men" simply begs the question.

First off, the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees is consisted of 10 men of which not all of them are white or Jewish, along with 7 women. This is not counting the two from Congress. The Board of Trustees were the ones who picked Dr. Hurwitz to become Gallaudet University's next president.  As for the "Hurwitz administration" it is consisted of the President's Cabinet and Staff.  The make up of people there are just as varied with men and women of different ethnic and racial backgrounds rather than an "all Jewish, white men" run administration.

The President's Cabinet is consisted of Dr. Alan T. Hurwitz (President), Dr. Stephen Weiner (Provost of Academic Affairs), Paul Kelly (Vice President of Administration & Finance), Eward Bosso (Vice President of Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center - KDES), Lynee Murray (Vice President of Development and Alumni Relations), Donald Beil (Chief of Staff), Cynthia King (Chief Information Officer), Catherine Andersen (Associate Provost of Enrollment Management and General Studies), Ann Powell (Associate Provost for Diversity) and Fred Weiner (Executive Director of Program Development).  The President's Staff, it is just as varied as well when you look at the names and faces of both men and women.

There is nothing in this current administration to show that it is run by an "all Jewish, white men" if you look at Gallaudet University's organizational chart. You can see that the Board of Trustees is at the top of the organizational chart, and not president Hurwitz.  He would be second in line. Those who work directly under president Hurwitz are Paul Kelly, Lynne Murray, Stephen Weiner, Cindy King, Ed Bosso and Don Beil. Certainly not a cadre of people that fits the "all Jewish, white men" ethnic/racial slam.

Such an accusation is simply irresponsible coming from one deaf person who have said such a thing as seen in a YouTube's comment area yesterday. And, no, I won't point out where or who this person is. Use your imagination. It wouldn't take much to figure out who this person is. You-know-who. Yet it is perfectly alright to question a person's line of work but to raise a person's ethnic upbringing (i.e. Jewish, Catholic, etc) or racial profile shouldn't be a part of the discussion in the first place. As for Hurwitz's case, his Jewish background and "whiteness" have nothing to do with running Gallaudet University as a whole. As far as I can tell, Dr. Hurwitz is still committed to diversity. 

There is no place for anti-semitic or racist undertones aimed at Gallaudet University or the president. Not at this day and age. Not ever.

Oh, btw, Merry Christmas!

ADDENDUM: If you are going to respond in the comment section do not use names. 

Charles Wirick YouTube Video Response

Finally, Charles Wirick has something to say on YouTube video.

Previous blogs on Charles Wirick

Mystery of the missing BnB's Wirick article
The curious case of the Wirick case
Charles Wirick responds to charges in his blog
Poll: Was Charles Wirick bullied and targeted unfairly?
The Charles Wirick's Case: Part 3 of 3 - Ganged up? 
The Charles Wirick's Case: Part 2 of 3 - Rumors
The Charles Wirick's Case: Part 1 of 3

Fund Ella's Hope

Here's a good Pepsi Refresh Project to click on and vote for $25,000 on helping promote greater awareness on the importance of Early Intervention Therapy for a child with this condition. Once a diagnosis is done early enough then proper treatment can begun in earnest that can enable a child to catch up to age appropriate grade levels on communication. Autism can be a life disabling condition unless early invention is done.

Next to vote for is the "Give Deaf Children a Voice" Pepsi Refresh project idea for $250,000. Currently it is in 33rd place. This is also another early intervention help on communication, only this time is to help deaf and hard of hearing children get the gift of speaking that will last a lifetime.

And while we're on the subject of Pepsi, some people continue to misconstrue the AGBell "Superbowl" Pepsi letter that was written almost 3 years ago on Jan 31, 2008 thinking it's a letter attacking sign language. Again, this hardly the truth when it's about raising awareness to Pepsi officials that the majority of deaf and hard of hearing people do not know sign language.  The letter explains to Pepsi that their commercial merely help perpetuates the false myth that most deaf and hard of hearing people know sign language. That is not true. The majority of deaf and hard of hearing people use spoken language as their primary mode of communication. Nothing more. Nothing less. And certainly not an attack on sign language or Deaf people.

Mystery of the missing BnB's Wirick article

This has gotten rather curious. An article written by Derrick Behm on Charles Wirick about his one year suspension over his alleged spreading of his own shooting threat rumor has suddenly disappeared off of the face of the Buff and Blue electronic newspaper website. A website that is owned by Gallaudet University and operated by the The Buff and Blue staff. The October 26, 2010 article disappeared around during the week of December 13. That article may have disappeared on December 17th on the same day when, supposedly if it is him, Charles Wirick created his own blog to counter accusations that he was the one who perpetuated the shooting threat rumors. December 17th was also the same day I decided to do a blog about Wirick coming out with his own blog and that's when I tried to check out BnB's article "Wirick suspended for one year for shooting threat rumor" to see if any additional comments were added but only to find out that the article/blog was taken completely off of the BnB website. My question is this. Why was it removed, Derrick Behm?

This was the second time that BnB did this. The first time it was taken off briefly only to only to correct the article and then it came online shortly thereafter. So far it has been two days since the Wirick article was taken offline.  Although the March 23, 2010 article "Barefoot Trouble" on Charles Wirick is still available about his barefoot walking attempt on campus about him getting back to "nature" so to speak. 

Regardless, the missing BnB article on Wirick is not forever gone. I have it on my MediaFire file hosting page and is available to those who would like to see it. Contact me if you want a copy of the missing article. It can only be seen using the Windows Internet Explorer browser page since it was saved as a Explorer browser. The saved copy of that BnB missing article also contains the 28 comments. Before it was deleted I think there were in excess of some 30+ comments. Since we might not get any answers until after the Christmas break in January 2011 I will keep the missing article available to those who wish to view it in the Windows Explorer browser page. Just let me know.

For what it's worth, I think Charles Wirick might have a case against the Student Conduct Board. A lot of things are not adding up here.



Previous blogs on Charles Wirick

The curious case of the Wirick case
Charles Wirick responds to charges in his blog
Poll: Was Charles Wirick bullied and targeted unfairly?
The Charles Wirick's Case: Part 3 of 3 - Ganged up? 
The Charles Wirick's Case: Part 2 of 3 - Rumors
The Charles Wirick's Case: Part 1 of 3

Video: deaf ice fishermen

Here's a video of deaf ice fishermen somewhere in Europe, perhaps in Russia, Poland or Lithuania. Although not in ASL and there are some captioning but not in English. Still it's interesting to see how they communicate and fish. It was a bit of a contest on seeing who got the most fish. You can probably make some sense of some of their signing but that's about it. The winner appears to be a woman and if so then the title of this YouTube video shouldn't be "fishermen." Heh.

The curious case of the Wirick case

Yesterday Charles (Chas) Wirick seems to have written his own blog to protest the one year suspension against him. A charge as it appears was related on starting the shooting rumor but he contends it wasn't him who began the rumor but others as he explained. He announced in his blog that he is appealing the ruling of the Student Conduct Board hearing.

There are questions as to how these hearings start. According to the Office of Student Conduct Disciplinary Proceedings (OSCDP) it appears that anyone can make any kind of charges:

Any member of the University community (administration, faculty, staff, and students) may request charges against any student(s) for alleged violations of the Student Code of Conduct.

Seems pretty easy to go after students if their is an agenda to retaliate.The OSCDP continues:

All allegations of violations should be prepared in writing and directed to the Coordinator of Student Conduct. In addition, any allegation of violations should be submitted as soon as possible after the event takes place.

If Charles Wirick says that others were the ones that started the rumors then where are the charges against them?

The Coordinator of Student Conduct may conduct an investigation to determine if the reported allegation(s) has merit and/or if they can be disposed of administratively by mediation or mutual consent of the parties involved on a basis acceptable to the Student Conduct Office staff. If the charges cannot be disposed of by mediation or mutual consent, the Student Conduct Office staff may later serve in the same manner as a non-voting member of the Student Conduct Board in a hearing.

Apparently mediation never occurred and that charges against Wirick were pending until after the hearing when they doled out the suspension as punishment.

According to disciplinary proceedings Charles Wirick does have the right to appeal his charges and suspension against him but there's a caveat...is it too late? Unless he has some new information or other relevant facts that were not available at the time of his hearing and within 5 days of his decision.

I. The student shall be informed of the right to appeal a decision to the Director of Student Conduct (or the Executive Director of Student Affairs, if the Director served as hearing officer in the case). A decision or judgment of the Coordinator of Student Conduct or hearing official may be appealed by either or both of the parties involved on the following grounds:

* The disciplinary conference was not conducted fairly and in conformity with prescribed procedures, which made it unfair. Deviations from designated procedures will not be a basis for sustaining an appeal unless significant unfairness results.

* New or newly discovered information that could not have been produced at the conference. In order for the Director of Student Conduct (or the Executive Director of Student Affairs, if the Director served as hearing officer in the case) to consider new information sufficient to alter a decision, or other relevant facts not brought out in the original conference, such information and/or facts must not have been known at the time of the original conference by the appellant.

* The decision is not supported by substantial information considering the record as a whole. That is, the facts in the case were not sufficient to establish that a violation of the Student Code of Conduct occurred.

* The sanction imposed was excessive or insufficient and not appropriate for the violation.

An appeal must be in writing, must indicate the basis of the appeal with an explanation, and must be made within five working days of the date the parties were notified of the decision. In an appeal case, sanctions assessed by the initial Coordinator of Student Conduct or hearing officer may be held in suspense until acted upon in appeal. The appeal will be reviewed by the Director of Student Conduct (or Executive Director of Student Affairs if the Director served as hearing officer), and he or she may affirm, reverse, or modify the sanction originally determined. The Coordinator of Student Conduct shall convey pertinent information related to the case. The decision of the Director of Student Conduct (or the Executive Director of Student Affairs if the Director served as hearing officer) is final.

Regardless, it appears to be a messy situation where the victim in all this appears to be Charles Wirick. What it appears is that miscommunication or misunderstanding was the possibility from those who could not understand Wirick's signing since he was still learning how to sign appropriately. He may have misapplied certain signed words or gestures that might have changed the context of what he was talking about and not about him making threats to do the shooting. Even Michael Sprouse made clear of Charles Wirick's background painting him through the implication that he's not a good signer because he was raised oral and with little exposure to Deaf culture and community.

Sprouse described Wirick in frank terms. “He was raised oral without much exposure to Deaf culture and community—and here at Gallaudet he, for the most part, was an outcast. Wirick vented to me before about deaf-to-deaf avdism, which enraged him. He didn’t like how Gallaudet treated him and didn’t know how to fit in the university.”

Big question of the day.  Did the Coordinator of Student Conduct, Student Conduct Office staff and Student Conduct Office itself ever consider the possibility of poor signing as a possibility for misunderstanding and miscommunication to occur causing other students to use that information and begin their own version of a rumor which ended up painting Wirick as a possible shooter?

After all in the Buff and Blue blog they wrote what Michael Sprouse said of Wirick on his signing:

“He looked so determined—full of menace—when he made that statement,” said Sprouse. He stated that Wirick described in graphic American Sign Language how the Kappa Gamma (KG) fraternity brothers, circled in their clique, would be gunned down in the cafeteria, and then the Phi Kappa Zeta (PKZ) sisters would be next."

Graphic ASL? I have two questions. If Charles Wirick not fluent in signing then how can it be "ASL"? It'd be more like PSE or lot of manual signing. Did Wirick sign in SEE? Second question, if it's not done in "ASL" then how was the "graphic signing" done? What did it look like? And so on. And if he's not that fluent or fluid in signing then shouldn't the possibility of poor signing be cause of this miscommunication and misunderstanding as a reason for rumors about him get out of control?

Yes, it appears that something is not right here. If Gallaudet University (i.e. Dr. Hurwitz) have any sense they should look into Wirick's case, the people in the Student Conduct Office and investigate further on these things.  Charles Wirick could be a case where he was unwittingly discriminated against and misunderstood because of his signing ability. And if so, then this does not bode well for all current and future students new to signing at Gallaudet University that their signing could be misconstrued/misunderstood as a threat to campus should they be in a casual discussion at a cafeteria, at Rathskeller or anywhere else on campus.  Did that happen to Charles Wirick? Was he a victim of poor circumstances here? Does Gallaudet University discriminate against poor signers?

We would like to know, Dr. Hurwitz. Do the right thing and look into this.


Addendum note: Curiously the Buff and Blue blog on Wirick is no longer available but I do have a copy of it should it not re-appear which I think it will to include news of Charles Wirick popping up with his own blog protesting the suspension. If not, then I will make the copy available for all. 

Gallaudet University struggles

With apologies to Cox and Forkum.

With all the latest campus bullying, the continuing abuse of new labels, closed society, Gallaudet University seeing less charities and donations each year, Deaf elitism, and the worsening economy make it all the harder for Gallaudet University to press forward for a more open and accepting university for all hearing, Deaf, deaf and hard of hearing students one would think these things would make it easier for Gallaudet University to contend with?  Hardly. The cartoon on the left aptly describes the weight the university must pull and endure.

I'd like to take this opportunity to raise a few facts and one of them is that Gallaudet University is seeing a serious reduction on gifts and pledges over the last few years now. All pledges or gifts (donations) must be reported in Gallaudet University's annual financial reporting under the Government Performance and Results Act. Pledges and gifts or donations are given by both Gallaudet University's alumni and non-alumni people. In 2007 it saw $9.5 million in gifts and pledges but in 2008 and 2009 saw drastic reductions in givings each year at $6.9 and $3.1 million dollars, respectively.  The report explained that the downturn in the economy was a big factor. Perhaps with the right people on board will help devise ways to help increase donations and monetary gifts. We'll see how that goes over the next 2 to 3 years. But lately there has been some grumblings about the recent hiring and appointments at Gallaudet University. Will a 3rd protest happen?

Charles Wirick responds to charges in his blog

It appears that Chas (Charles) Wirick has set up his own blog to counter charges against him "Charles Wirick evidence from Cases." Go and read what he has to say, if the blog is in fact Wirick's which it does appears to be so. The same message in his blog was also left in my blog comment as well

I, Charles Wirick, am appealing the ruling of the Student Conduct Board hearing on two basis:

The decision was not supported by substantial information considering the record as a whole. The facts in the case were not sufficient to establish that a violation of the Student Code of Conduct occurred.

Fact:

There were no physical, verbal abuse, threats, intimidation, harassment, and coercion proven at the hearing. I did not, according to the facts do any of them.

Seven students reported a possible threat of a shooting according to DPS reports. This is suppose to be the reason why I was detained and questioned.

Facts according to DPS reports:

Justin Christian reported that Matt Harris and Jerrod Cunningham were talking about shooting.(It was these two and Justin McDormain and Michael Sprouse that were in the student center talking about the shooting before I arrived) Justin did not name me.

Justin McDormain is not a student. He said at the hearing that Michael started the rumor, not me.

Jelynn Louis reported that Matt Harris and Jerrod Cunningham were talking about a shooting. I was not mentioned.

Britny Latham stated that Matt Harris and Jerrod Cunningham were talking about a shooting and that he started a fire in the dorm. I was not mentioned.

Amanda Biskupiak admitted that I warned her, but she did not understand my sign.

Rachel Steingieser said the same thing as Amanda and repeated that she did not understand my sign.

Stacey DeLaune reported that I warned her about the shooting that 4 others were talking about in student center. She told me to go to DPS and report it so I did.

The sanction imposed was excessive and insufficient and not appropriate.

I was found guilty of spreading rumors that scared and caused panic. I was suspended for one year.

Fact:

I threatened no one.

I was told to report threats to staff, which I did.

I went to DPS and reported it.

I went to Nikki my dorm staff and reported it.

I did not start the rumors, proof shows that four other students did.(Justin, not a current student, admitted that Michael started the rumors at the hearing and he is Mike’s friend).

We are told to report threats. If rumors are grounds for suspension then that should have been the charge and all students that spread rumors should have gotten the same suspension. One year is excessive.

You can read previous blogs about the Charles Wirick case in Part I, II and III.

According to Charles the confusion and misunderstanding appears to revolve around the signing miscommunication on not being able to understand some of Charles Wirick's signing. I brought up this possibility in my earlier blog. Interesting. And that he wasn't the one who spread the rumor.

Gallaudet University - An Indoctrination Camp?

Let's look at the term "indoctrination." From the Merriam dictionary it means, "to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle." In other words, indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, or cognitive strategies. Accordingly so, an indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine such doctrine (or a set of ideas or beliefs that are taught or believed to be true) they have learned. The word "inculcating" is to teach those by frequent repetitions or by admonitions (shaming).

No doubt that Gallaudet University continues to try and indoctrinate new students to new ideas, concepts and principles as would any colleges or universities. What sets this university from others is the constant inculcating of ideas and attitudes on campus through repetitions and sometimes through shaming (or admonition) by both students and staff. Instead of welcoming new ideas that may appear anathema there's a process where admonition may take place. One was the recent admonition of allowing "hearing space" on campus. Another kind of admonition could be against those who speak instead of signing while in a public space during a private conversation. And perhaps compare that to some students who may listen to their iPod music through their earpieces with the cords dangling while walking around on campus? Which ire would be greater or possible in receiving that admonition? Another could be the question of whether one student was supposedly not "Deaf enough" as one of the possible reason for his expulsion and perhaps an example when conformity failed and admonition succeeded? Or what about the admonition of the new Board of Trustees makeup that include Donna Sorkin and Vinton Cerf? 

What about the attempt to inculcate new ideas and concepts by successfully inculcated graduates to others like injecting "deafhood," "avdism," "deaf center," "subaltern elite," "colonialism," and so on and at the same time use those concepts against other deaf or hard of hearing people instead of welcoming them as part of the larger hearing loss family and seek out greater diversity? Is it better to adhere to a constant mindset that's more Borg-like in its philosophy when it comes to distinctiveness, ironically so? Or is respecting diversity and various philosophies be the better path as Dr. T. Alan Hurwitz is attempting to do in his "From Isolation to Innovation" as described during his presidential briefing focusing on partnerships and pulling down barriers?

Are we seeing an increase in diversity, for example, the Gallaudet University's Board of Trustees  appointing (not hired but appointed!) of Vinton Cerf and Donna Sorkin, and the hiring Catherine Murphy as the new Executive Director of Public and Media Relations? How so? Well, Vinton Cerf is hard of hearing and is a part of the majority of deaf and hard of hearing population that does not use sign language. He is known as the "father of the internet" and works for Google since 2005. Vinton Cerf was also the recipient of an award from Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.  Donna Sorkin is currently vice president of consumer affairs at Cochlear Americas and at one time served as the executive director of the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. And as for Catherine Murphy, she was once recently the director of communications and public affairs for the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing before coming to work at Gallaudet University. Lots of diversity being incorporated into Gallaudet University at the upper level. As a reminder, Gallaudet University is now accepting new nominations of new Trustees.

Perhaps the real "fencing problem" is the indoctrinated members who managed to isolate themselves even further by attacking those whose only crime is having a hearing loss and different set of philosophies?

Has Gallaudet University become less of an educational experience and more of an indoctrination process by spitting out indoctrinated students?  Or is Dr. Hurwitz helping to turn that around by helping Gallaudet University become more diversified?

Just playing the devil's advocate here. Or am I? Though I'm still thinking...

Do you get chills and goosebumps listening to certain music?

For those born with a hearing loss or those who lost some of their hearing very early in life, I am wondering whether hard of hearing or deaf people get chills and goosebumps whenever a certain music is played. A research article came out recently that discussed why some people get chills and goosebumps whenever they listen to a particular genre of music.  Do you get chills and goosebumps from listening to a certain music?

I get chills from listening to certain kind of music that comes with singing, especially with a chorus along with certain instruments that help deliver an additional emotional energy to it all. One good example of chills I get every time I listen to is the Hallelujah! chorus music. Recently a Hallelujah! flash mob took place at a mall last month. It was recorded and put onYouTube where it has gone spectacularly viral with over 18 million views (see below) since November 17, 2010. For me on the voices it depends on the vocal texture, vocal timbre, and vocal transition points like breaks, lifts and falls can certainly hit me and give me goosebumps. Hallelujah! is one of those pieces when the chorus is done right with the music will give goosebumps. But then there's another component to this Hallelujah! that brings more "inspirational chills" and that's the message behind the song.



Hallelujah (Aleluya)
Written by George Friedrich Handel

Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah
Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah

For the lord God omnipotent reigneth
Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah
For the lord God omnipotent reigneth
Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah
For the lord God omnipotent reigneth
Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah

Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah
Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah
(For the lord God omnipotent reigneth)
Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah

For the lord God omnipotent reigneth
(Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah)
Hallelujah

The kingdom of this world;
is become
the kingdom of our Lord,
and of His Christ
and of His Christ

And He shall reign for ever and ever
And he shall reign forever and ever
And he shall reign forever and ever
And he shall reign forever and ever

King of kings forever and ever hallelujah hallelujah
and lord of lords forever and ever hallelujah hallelujah
King of kings forever and ever hallelujah hallelujah
and lord of lords forever and ever hallelujah hallelujah
King of kings forever and ever hallelujah hallelujah
and lord of lords
King of kings and lord of lords

And he shall reign
And he shall reign
And he shall reign
He shall reign
And he shall reign forever and ever

King of kings forever and ever
and lord of lords hallelujah hallelujah
And he shall reign forever and ever

King of kings and lord of lords
King of kings and lord of lords
And he shall reign forever and ever

Forever and ever and ever and ever
(King of kings and lord of lords)

Hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah
Hallelujah

What is John Tracy Clinic expertise in?

There seems to be a bit of a round robin by certain Deaf people in taking pot shots at the John Tracy Clinic program. What some Deaf people don't seem to understand is that the JTC program is very specific in what it can offer and the support they can give to parents of kids from age 0 to 5 years old that were diagnosed with hearing loss. Obviously, if an organization has a specific expertise in what it can offer then that is what they can offer and nothing else. The expertise at John Tracy Clinic is in spoken language which can be used with any other communication approaches. 

John Tracy Clinic offers information and distance courses for families of children with hearing loss ages birth to five. The focus is language development with ideas for learning through child play and family routines. The expertise at John Tracy Clinic is in spoken language which is emphasized in onsite programs such as the Parent/Infant Program and Preschool, as well as via Distance Education for Parents, but many of the techniques can be used in any communication approach. The key is to provide children with early and complete access to communication to help them fully develop their language skills. Development of complex communication skills helps children be ready for school. There are no limits to what children with hearing loss can achieve.

Many techniques used in the JTC spoken language program can be used with other communication choices or options such as Auditory-Verbal, Auditory-oral, Cued Speech, Total Communication, and Formal Sign Language (American Sign Language (ASL) or Sign Language of other countries).  It is obvious that JTC recognizes ASL but that is not their area of expertise. Their area of expertise is spoken language. It has always been like that. They do recognize that there is no one shoe size fits all and that the parents are the ones who make their own informed decision regarding their child with a hearing loss when it comes to communication and language options.

What does JTC offer?

1) Early detection of hearing loss and information on individualized intervention

2) A spoken language learning opportunity for infants and preschoolers who are deaf and hard-of-hearing and their parents

3) Guidance, support and instruction for parents in the special skills necessary tohelp their children learn spoken language

4) Distance education serving parents and families throughout the world

5) Over 60 years of experience in teacher and professional education

Again, John Tracy Clinic main area of expertise is and has always been in the spoken language area. Without their help I would not be who I am today as seen in my video dedication to JTC. May they continue for many more decades.

Pick the Pepsi Challenge to help Deaf Kids!

Here's your chance to vote in the 2010 Pepsi Challenge and vote for your favorite idea on who could could use a $250,000 grant. Voting ends on December 31, 2010. So, go ahead and vote! And maybe a chance to help out 175 deaf kids!




Here are the goals should John Tracy Clinic get the award:

* Provide significant funding for one year of preschool services
* Teach parents how to advocate for their deaf child's future
* Help 175 deaf children learn spoken language