Tag-Archive for » Bilingualism «

06
Jan

Oppression of Spanish and ASL in Education Part II: Reductionist vs Holistic Paradigms


Below is the English version:

Further Parallels between Bilingual Latino and ASL-English bilingual Deaf Students

I have noticed some parallels between the issues faced by bilingual Latino students, and the ones faced by Deaf ASL/English bilingual students.  In Manuel’s situation, did the teachers who marked his written test check his passage for content—that is, did Manuel answer the question posed to him in the test? Did the teachers analyze the passage in its entirety what Manuel said?

No, the teachers focused on the errors in spelling, capitalization and punctuation, which were parts of the whole passage so that they missed whether Manuel actually answered the question!

Manuel answered both parts of the question!  He wanted to be Juan Carlos because the other student was smarter than Manuel was.  Manuel expressed his opinion and feelings of inadequacy in intellectual ability.  He has explained why he was feeling stupid.  Therefore, he has completed what was required of him. What is more, he gave his own opinion and explained his point of view.  Unfortunately, because of those spelling, punctuation and capitalization errors, the content was lost, and the passage labeled UNREADABLE.

This same type of situation has occurred with many Deaf ASL/English bilingual students. If errors in the form of missing articles or misspellings were found, the students’ answers were automatically wrong, regardless of whether they actually answered questions.  ASL Bilingual students were frequently placed in grade 1 programs even though they were Grade 4 students.

[Clarification is needed here: When I mention Deaf ASL/English bilingual students, I am talking about those who have already acquired all the linguistic features in ASL, from birth (i.e. children from ASL Deaf families).   I am not talking about Deaf students who have not acquired full command of either ASL or English (due to language deprivation).  Please keep this in mind.]

Impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Legislation in the USA:

What happens when Latino (and other minority) students fail English written tests (i.e., high stakes state tests)?  Schools are required to provide remedial programs, so these students get limited curriculum and learn only reading and math all day in English.

For example, since NCLB (No Child Left Behind) legislation was passed, according to Dr. Escamilla on p. 8, students like Manuel could get schedules that contain:

  • more reading and math
  • no recess
  • for Bilingual Learners (i.e. Manuel)- More English
  • Less gym, art and music
  • Bilingualism is ignored (Spanish language is no longer taught as a language or study or instruction, and English becomes the ONLY language taught and studied).

Why won’t students like Manuel be able to continue bilingual education, using both English and Spanish as languages of instruction and study?

There are many  teachers and educational professionals who believe that Spanish is interfering with English language development of Latino students, therefore Spanish should NOT be taught or included in the school system. Once Spanish is removed from the program, it would make it easier for these students to develop English writing/reading skills more quickly. This will solve his English problems. Right?

WRONG!

These beliefs held by the educational professionals who work with Latino students are quite similar to those held by many educational professionals working with Deaf students.

Many Deaf ASL bilingual students have been told:

  1. that English is more important than ASL
  2. that they cannot improve in English because ASL was interfering with English development
  3. ASL should be replaced with flawed communicative methods (i.e. Total Communication, Signed Exact English) to help them develop English skills. (This, proved to be a disastrous mistake that made things worse for the students.)

So far, the parallels between the Latino and ASL/English bilingual students in the educational system have been quite similar.

REDUCTIONIST- An attempt to make the complex simple. (p. 5, Escamilla, 2009)

Why is there pressure to remove the languages of Spanish and ASL from the educational system in order to focus on the English language?

This is because the system is of a monolingual bent.  English rules supreme as the official language in the USA.  This is despite the fact that there are not supposed to be any official languages in the country.  English is the ultimate, and the only, language students are expected to acquire and study.

Bilingualism is out. Teachers have been trained in universities under the monolingual system in the USA.  This means that the teachers have been trained to think in monolingual terms. They have not received training in bilingual language development, and do not understand how to look at things from bilingual lens.  bilingualism.  They have not studied the intricacies inherent in bilingual education to date.

So, what happens is that instead of looking at the whole child, with two languages, they focus on the child’s development of ONE language…English.    Rather, they have learned to seek out errors (deficiencies) in the child’s English writing without taking into account the effects of bilingual development.

For instance, Manuel is bilingual.  He speaks Spanish and English.  Wow!  This fact should have be taken into account in a positive way. What should be examined is how the development of two distinct languages (and Manuel’s background) affect the child’s written work.  This did not happen.

The teachers who marked Manuel’s passage focused on errors in English from a monolingual perspective.  They forgot to take into account the Spanish background that may influence how the passage has been written.   Instead of looking at the passage as a whole, including the content—message—and whether it actually answered the question, they focused on nitpicking on the errors in spelling, punctuation.

That is reductionist.

Think of a large complex picture that is amazing—(like a Rembrandt painting for example).  People are awed by that picture, until they spot a small section of the picture that has errors. They focus on that errors and spend all their energies criticizing those errors. The result is that the whole complex picture has been trashed, and reduced to that ONE section.  The whole picture is judged on the basis of that ONE section.

Complexity has been reduced to simplicity.  That is reductionist.

Reductionist Paradigm Leads To Misunderestimation

The reductionist paradigm caused those teachers to focus on the small, deficient, components of Manuel’s passage that rather than the whole content, which answered the question correctly. Unfortunately, the attention to the deficiencies resulted in a “F”, or unreadable mark.

As mentioned before, this focus on the parts rather than the whole has negatively impacted not only bilingual Latino students, but also Deaf ASL/English bilingual students.

This reductionist paradigm has led to the phenomenon of misunderestimation.

Simply put, misunderestimation is a combination of misunderstanding and underestimation.  In other words, professionals in the educational system does not understand the language development of bilingual students.  As a result of that misunderstanding, these professionals underestimate the skills and abilities of those bilingual students.

This misunderestimation of many bilingual Latino students and Deaf ASL-English bilingual students occur because they do not fit within the system’s reductionist viewpoint of the world.

Reductionist  Monolingualism Paradigm to Holistic Bilingualism Paradigm

Dr. Escamilla recommends a complete overhaul of the educational system.  There needs to be a shift from the reductionist paradigm to the holistic paradigm.  Allow me to explain.

For the sake of  bilingual children of Latino, ASL and other language minority groups, the educational system must be overhauled, and shifted from the current reductionist paradigm to a holistic paradigm, which includes bilingualism.

Shifting from the reductionist paradigm to the holistic paradigm… what does that mean?

Reductionist paradigm is the monolingual one.  This is where the idea is held that having two languages is too complicated and therefore must be reduced to a single language for study in schools.  This entails ignoring any other languages, including the language which a bilingual child has acquired/learned.   This forces the bilingual child to focus only on English at the expense of that child’s native language.

This paradigm does not fit the bilingual child’s learning needs at all.  This is because reductionism focuses on fixing the perceived deficiencies in the child’s development of English (thereby misunderstanding and underestimating that child’s true language ability).  This has proven to be a failure for Spanish-English bilingual children, nor for the ASL-English bilingual children.

Thus, the monolingual reductionist paradigm must be abandoned in order to examine the whole bilingual child’s learning process.  This examination would lead educators to better understand how Latino children’s acquisition of Spanish affects their learning of English, and work with both languages.  Educators would do well to examine how ASL affects the ASL-English bilingual children’s development of English, and work with both languages.  This way, the whole child’s needs would be addressed.  That is what the holistic paradigm is.

There is much research information out there on bilingualism.  For instance, Dr. Escamilla has done much research on this.  So has Dr. Laura Ann Petitto (who specializes on the study of the brain and effects of bilingual learning on the brain.). Research on bilingualism would support the shift from the reductionist paradigm to the holistic one.

It is now time for universities, teacher training programs, and schools to begin shifting from the monolingual reductionist paradigm to the bilingual (multilingual) holistic paradigm. Once educational professionals are trained on bilingual learning processes, they would be able to look at the students’ written test responses from a holistic perspective.  They would be better able to analyze the contents as a whole, with bilingual lens.  Instead of reducing the contents to errors and dismissing the whole written passage without analyzing for bilingual effects, the teachers would then take steps to design a bilingual program to support the students’ bilingual learning process.

It would behoove the educational system to encourage a bilingual education program in which both languages are studied from Kindergarten to Grade 12, rather than drop the minority language during the elementary years.    This would, in the end, benefit ALL bilingual children, regardless of their language backgrounds. This is why the holistic paradigm has to be adopted.

What can be done to ensure that this paradigm shift occurs? People must become advocates and pressure the government and educators to make the necessary reforms to completely overhaul the educational system so that the flawed, reductionist monolingual model is jettisoned in favour of the bilingual holistic model.  That means ensuring that legislations and policies be reformed that will effect paradigm shifts in government, universities, and schools.

We have an enormous job ahead of us, but it MUST be done.  The current status quo in the educational system, and society, is not acceptable.  At present, all bilingual children, including the Latino and ASL children as well as those from other language minority groups are experiencing severe language oppression and marginalization in favour of English only.  This must end now.

 

Reference:

Escamilla, K. The Misunderestimation of Manuel: Issues in Reductionist Paradigms and Parallel Monolingual Frameworks in the Quest to Improve Policy and Practice for Bilingual Learners. University of Colorado. Boulder, Colorado, 2009

 

CAVEAT: Ad hominem attacks, derogatory and inflammatory comments will NOT be published. 

Category: Bilingualism, Deaf, Deaf Education  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  3 Comments
05
Jan

Parallel Oppression of Spanish and ASL in Education Part I: “Manuel”

APPROXIMATE ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

In America—North America—there are Spanish-English bilingual programs  isn’t there? There are ASL-English bilingual school programs as well, correct?  So, everything is fine and dandy, eh?  Actually, no.

Both the languages of Spanish and ASL are struggling with systemic oppression in education. This means that Latino children who can speak both Spanish and English are quite struggling within the education system.  ASL/English bilinguals (those who use ASL and English) experience similar struggles under the educational system as well.

Where’s the evidence to back up the above statement?

“Manuel”—who is he, anyway? He is a Grade 4 student of Latino family background who speaks Spanish as well as English, and lives in Colorado. He was required to do a written English test in response to this question:

If you could be someone else for a day, who would you be? Why would you want to be that person?

I have put up an excerpt from Dr. Kathy Escamilla’s article, The Misunderestimation of Manuel: Issues in Reductionist Paradigms and Parallel Monolingual Frameworks in the Quest to Improve Policy and Practice for Bilingual Learners (2009).

Dr. Escamilla discussed this student whose name, Manuel, is a pseudonym.  He wrote a passage which was translated by Dr. Kathy Escamilla:

If you could be someone else for a day, who would you be? Why would you want to be that person?

“I would be Juan Carlos. I would like to be him because he is proficient in math.  I was mostly the dumbest kid, but as the year went by I got smarter. Now I’m back where I was all over again.  I really hate that because I’m really stupid, plus I am partially proficient in math and Juan is proficient in math.  And, I am unsatisfactory in writing and reading. Him too but he’s a lot smarter then me. I’m stupidest in the whole entire school.  That’s the truth.  That’s why I want to be him. This is the truth. I’ve never told anybody this, I haven’t told a soul.” (Escamilla, 2009, p. 14)

I am now translating this passage into ASL.  (ASL TRANSLATION IS GIVEN)

This is “Manuel”, a HEARING Grade 4 student of Latino family background, Latino heritage.  He lives in Colorado, like I explained earlier.  It looks like there is nothing wrong with his intellect. He is a bilingual student since he speaks both Spanish (his native language) and English. The problem is, as we can see, Manuel has a low opinion of himself and his intellectual ability.  He actually feels dumb.

Now that you, the Deaf audience, has seen this story, you can relate.  Many would understand how Manuel felt.  I get this, too.  So many Deaf students who are bilingual in both ASL and English have felt stupid and incompetent in the use of English.  Guess what?

Manuel got placed in a Special Education program!  He has been placed at Grade 1 level (and not Grade 4) for English.

That’s exactly what so many Deaf students have gone through (in the educational system) even though they were in Grades 4, 5, or 6.   They still got their English skills placed at Grade 1.  Do you remember that old refrain about Deaf students graduating from high school with only Grade 4th English skills, and couldn’t “read or write”?

Well, it looks like many Latino children go through similar things, even though there haven’t been research (to my knowledge) that says they graduate with only grade 4 level writing/reading skills.  Latino children have been placed in special education, just like Deaf children have!

How did “Manuel” end up with Grade 1 program for language?  He can speak English! He also speaks Spanish. How???

Take a look at his actual writing from Escamilla’s article, page 4: 

I wub be hwankarlos  i wud like to  be Hem bekuse hes  is pofisint imat I was mosiy the bumist kib but as the yer went biy.I gat smort r naw im the bak wer I was all over ugen. I rilly haytrat bekuse Im rily stupib plus. IM amin parsory pofisit I math and havan is in pofisint in math and. I am unahfktor in ritingandriding.Hem to but hes alat smartr ven my I’M stupibist in the hol intir skul school that’s the truth that’s wy I want to be hem this is the trut. Iv hir r told enydoty This I havit told asol.

Teachers in Colorado, who collected and examined 2,000 student writing samples, rated his passage UNREADABLE and did not analyze his writing further.  Teachers said Manuel did not have any strengths in his English writing.

Dr. Escamilla, a well-known Latino educator/researcher who is bilingual in Spanish and English, argues that Manuel’s writing should not be rated UNREADABLE.  She recognizes that Manuel used strategies to write English.  The “problem” is that Manuel has Spanish language influences.  I do notice Spanish influence in his writing. (I have taken Spanish in university long ago, but right now my command of the language is extremely rusty.)  One example I can give you is this:

hwankarlos – Juan Carlos.  Spanish speakers pronounce Ju as Hw

Escamilla gives further examples of Spanish-influenced “errors”:

  • Trut  (truth)
  • My (me)
  • Enydoty (anybody)
  • Wy (why)

Manuel was applying Spanish phonetic rules to his writing. This application of one language’s rules to another language also occurs with ASL and English. So, there are parallel issues for ASL/English and Spanish/English.  For instance:

Food Store me love go-often what? Canadian Superstore.

Does this follow English grammatical structure? No.  But, if it was written thusly, then this sentence would automatically be considered erroneous, without a doubt.

What I have seen frequently while growing up with my classmates and many others: Written English papers would show missing articles (the, a, verbs (is, will, etc).  This is because ASL does not have articles like “the” since that article is used in the English language.

When teachers see the missing articles and verbs, they assume the writers make those mistakes because they do not have the writing English skills.  This is a misassumption.  Rather, this is a language transfer error which impacts and influences how the second language is used.

That is precisely what happened here for, both Spanish and ASL.   So, the issues that face Latino students parallel those that face ASL (Deaf) students. It is clear that the educational system oppresses languages other than English.  Spanish and ASL are both being marginalized, and oppressed in favour of English monolingualism.

In the next post, further parallels between the experiences of Latino students and ASL/English students, respectively, will be examined in the context of the educational system. Issues will be raised, and the questions of whether the education system needs reform, and how to go about it, will be discussed.

CAVEAT: Ad hominem attacks, derogatory and inflammatory comments will NOT be published. 

Category: Bilingualism, Deaf, Deaf Education  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  2 Comments
06
Mar

Parental Choice: Truth or Illusion?

Interesting.  I just viewed the three-part blog series “The Right to Be…Deaf” at Patti Durr’s People of the Eye.  This series reminded me of the v/blog posts I created last May on the subject of neutrality. The question raised in my two posts was whether the information being given to parents of newly-diagnosed Deaf babies and children was neutral or not.  Here are the titles which you can click to view (Neutrality: Does It Exist? and Got Neutrality? )

In Patti’s blog series, she raises the question on whether parents were given choices without undue pressure to go for a specific option.   Part II of Durr’s series describes what ensues at hospitals soon after babies are born (with infant hearing screenings).  That particular post brought a flashback of  my experience at an audiology clinic with my second eldest infant son.

Before I go into details about that experience, I must let you know that I am a Deaf mother of 5 Hearing boys.  Despite the fact that my babies were found to be hearing, I still encountered audism during one of my boys’ testings.  My eldest was born in a hospital.  Two weeks later, I brought him to an audiology clinic to find out if he was hearing or deaf.  My suspicion that he was Hearing was confirmed.

My third son, who was born at home rather than at a hospital, never took an official hearing screen test.   My husband and I decided to skip the infant hearing screen because it was so obvious that the baby was Hearing.  Our home-made hearing test came in the form of our two older sons, aged 1 1/2 and 2 1/2 or 3 years old.  The noise they produced kept startling the baby.  That cheap home-made hearing test sure saved the government oodles of dollars that time!

My youngest, the twins, were born in the hospital rather than in the home due to the fact that twin pregnancies are automatically considered high risk.   The morning after the boys were born, they each received an on-site hearing screening test.  The results were that they were hearing.  Technology have clearly improved to the point that there was no need for drugs to sedate them (unlike the situations described in the comments section of Patti’s Part III blog).

My experience with my second eldest son was different from that of my other boys.  He was born at home, so that meant I had to take him to the audiology clinic a couple or so weeks later.  It was eleven and a half years ago, but the memory is still fresh in my mind.  I had to nurse him to sleep so the ABR test could be performed.  Halfway through the test, I had to switch him to the other breast so his other ear could be tested.  While nursing him to sleep, I inadvertently fell asleep as well.  I must have been tired that day!

After a few minutes, I woke up just as the test was completed.  The audiologist was looking at her computer and machines when suddenly she seemed disturbed. I could perceive a look of alarm on her face. That caused me to think that something was up.  She looked back at us then at the screen and back with anxiety in her body language and on her face.   I looked down at my sleeping infant and noticed that one of the wires fell off his scalp.  I brought the audiologist’s attention to that fact.  She administered the test on that ear once more.  Once the results were in, there was an obvious look of relief on her face.

“He is hearing.”

Supposing the results were like this: One ear was Hearing, but the other ear was deaf.  She would likely still have that look of alarm on her face and tension in her body.  That would give me a clear message right there.  Supposing my boy were hard of hearing, what kind of message would her body and words impart?  I don’t know, but her alarm and body language were indelibly marked in my memory.  I will never forget that.

Patti Durr’s description of the type of pressures American parents face in hospitals, regardless of whether these parents were Deaf or Hearing.  When babies are diagnosed Deaf, audism run rampant in hospitals.  Buzz phrases like ” your baby failed the hearing test” are used and impart negative messages to the parents.   Pamphlets on cochlear implants are given out to parents soon after the Deaf babies are diagnosed.   Deaf parents of Deaf babies experience and react to audism in the approaches used by medical professionals in dealing with them. (See comments section here.)

The combination of  infant hearing screening tests, cochlear implant pamphlets and “neutral” websites cause me to question whether parents were given true choices.

Are parents given TRUE choices?

Remember: I am a Deaf parent.  I have witnessed the negative facial and body language of that audiologist.  I cannot help but conclude that if my child were diagnosed to hard of hearing, I would have received a negative message.   Of that, I have no doubt.

Supposing that I were a Hearing mother with a newly diagnosed Deaf baby, and saw that alarmed facial expression and body language, what would my reaction be?  I would have been taken aback, confused and upset .  To make matters worse, I would be regretfully told, “Your child has failed the hearing test.”  Shock, dismay and grief would follow that statement, especially when combined with the negative message given with that type of body language.

The audiologist would follow up with a reassuring “Don’t worry.  There are cochlear implants and speech therapy available to help your child become more like us.  The Infant Hearing Program will help you with this. “  Pamphlets are given to the beleaguered mother who is overwhelmed with what has to be done to rehabilitate her child.

Supposing that parent is told: “Don’t worry. I have a Deaf mentor available to support you.  Your Deaf child is fortunate to be able to develop two languages–English and ASL–and grow up in two cultures. This will be a wonderful experience for you”?  That would be great, but that has not happened.  To date, I have not heard of any audiologists or other medical professional say that, ever.  It’s usually ”Sorry, your baby failed the hearing screening test.”

Now, that’s BIAS for you! Usually, information about ASL is not shared (or at least mentioned briefly).  Pamphlets on CIs are available to be given out, with alacrity. ”

“and we get the news – it is delivered to us with concerned looks, wringing of hands, and glossy pamphlets, DVDs, and display models of what CAN be DONE to overcome what IS

yes, instead of another basket of goodies and words of congratulations on your wee things Deafhood, we are whacked on the head with ….. the A word folks.  And no it is not spelled with a “v” (ask the NAD they know how to spell it correctly)

we see the news and we sigh – just what we wanted “A healthy baby and we knew s/he was healthy all along” – healthy for us means Deaf or Hearing -  y nada mas importa

but wait despite our joy and relief – they “the specialists” are still frowning – they is VERY worried now

they start selling their wares – they start tooting the scope of their practice ”

(Durr. People of the Eye blog. March 5)

Is that giving out neutral information?  Can you say websites like this give out neutral and balanced information? Can you say that parents are given complete unbiased information with which to make their decisions? No, you cannot. (That particular website doesn’t even mention ASL. You have to make an effort to look for it in a link there somewhere.) There is CLEAR BIAS here in favour of making Deaf children hear rather than allow them to be Deaf bilinguals, exposed to ASL and ASL Deaf culture as well as English.

Back to my question…

Are parents of newly diagnosed babies given true choice in raising their Deaf children?  Are they being given the chance to make a  true choice without undue influence or pressure from audistic medical professionals and biased pamphlets and websites? Without subtle and subliminal messages that it is not a good thing for a child to be Deaf?

QUESTION OF THE DAY:

Have parents of  Deaf babies able to exercise TRUE choice in the first place?  Or is “True Choice” an illusion?

 

ADDENDUM: Here is another vlog (captioned) by Dr. Donald Grushkin for your viewing pleasure on the same issue.

Category: Audism, Bilingualism, Deaf, Family  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  7 Comments
09
Jan

Wow! iPhone App as an Educational Tool for Deaf Kids in Newfoundland!


Newfoundland-Labrador Minister of Education Darin King promised to provide technological support in the classroom for Deaf/Hard of hearing children in mainstream setting in the province after closing Newfoundland School for the Deaf.   Check out the last paragraph in his response to Gary Malkowski’s August 7 letter in The Telegram.

Here’s the excerpt in case you have trouble accessing the link:

The Department of Education will continue to provide a sound education and opportunities for networking within the larger community by supplying iPhones to the Deaf and Hard of Hearing students, their teachers and parents to create better access for communication. We are working in liaison with Canadian Hard of Hearing Association – NL (CHHA-NL) to keep abreast of the latest technology and advice for setting up classrooms that are conducive for learning.

King delivered on his promise to supply iPhones to the students, parents and teachers last October… sort of.   The recipients received iPhone 3G which does NOT have video capability.  Goes to show what he knows about Deaf children and their needs. ZIP. NADA. ZERO.

OH. OOPS. I digress. Back to the subject at hand…

I was asked to give my opinion on the iASL app as a tool for the classroom since I am a Deaf ASL-bilingual teacher.   I have an iPhone 3GS (which has video capability).  This is my opinion:

I downloaded and then put the  iASL app to the acid test… it failed miserably.

1. For English sentences to be translated into ASL, you have to type only  5 words at a time.

I wanted to type: The Persians defeated the Spartans at the Battle of Thermoplyae.  (This is because  I had taught a high school World History class at a Deaf school several years ago.)  I was limited to this:

Persians defeated Spartans at Thermoplyae.

The ASL TRANSLATION was in English words (gloss) but in ASL order (or close enough).  The text looked like this:
Spartans
Thermoplyae
Persians
ARREST
Then I clicked VIEW.  What happened next had me slapping myself in the forehead and groaning.
For Spartans, Thermoplyae and Persians… I got a black background with white text “S” then a woman appeared onscreen and produced S and fades to black, then the letter P appears and the woman appears and produces P.   and so on until EVERY letter was spelled.
No lexicalized fingerspelling.  It took forever, then finally, when we arrived at ARREST, she signed ARREST.
Unfortunately, that’s not the sign I’d have chosen.  I’d have used an entirely different ASL word to properly explain the defeat term. Also, there’s no nonmanual grammar signals/markers. No lexicalized fingerspelling was use.  It wasn’t possible with the type of technology available!

You may wish to view my ASL description of the Battle of Thermoplyae in my ASL vlog above (2:49-6:09).  (Remember that movie, The 300? That was based on the Battle of Thermoplyae!)  You will see me give an abridged version of the epic battle, and then show the book, Gates of Fire, which is one of my sources of information for that historical event.

2. iASL doesn’t have ASL words for the English words like province, Ontario, Newfoundland, etc, because iASL is an American innovation, and designed only to develop ASL signs that is standard, and ignores ASL regional differences.

MY RATING: I give the iASL app THUMBS DOWN for use in the classroom.

3. The use of iASL for networking within the larger (Hearing) community will only serve as a hindrance rather than an asset.

Can you imagine trying as a  high school student to gossip via iASL app with peers about someone cheating on his/her sweetheart, especially given the cumbersome translation process as demonstrated in the vlog?  Worse yet, that iPhone 3G doesn’t even have the video capacity to capture ASL comments of the Deaf student, let alone translate them into English text!  The iASL app doesn’t even have the capability to translate ASL into English text to facilitate a two-way conversation!  Wow! That’s a sure-fire way to destroy networking efforts among students.

The best place for opportunities for natural barrier-free social interactions with peers in ASL and development of strong social skills are actually in a Deaf school.  Oh yeah. That’s right. (*Smacking my forehead*) I forgot. The NL minister of education closed the ONLY remaining school for the Deaf in the Maritimes.

4. iASL app will NEVER replace QUALIFIED, LIVE, ASL (or LSQ) interpreters in parent/teacher meetings.

What about Deaf parents of mainstreamed Deaf/Hard of Hearing children who need to meet with monolingual Hearing teachers? Could they have used iASL app/iPhone technology to bypass the need for a real live ASL interpreter? Again, given what was demonstrated in this post, the answer would have to be a resounding  NO!

How could we forget LSQ?  There is NO app for LSQ.  So, Francophones and LSQ users are flat out of luck.  Sorry.

To use an over-used buzz word of today… EPIC FAIL!

My grade for the iASL app and iPhone 3G technology…BIG FAT F!

So much for ASL and technological support in the classroom and networking with the larger community as promised by the all-knowing Minister of Education King!

Had Minister King consulted with any of the Deaf educators at NSD or outside the province as well as Deaf technies rather than with CHHA-NL, he would have known all this before wasting thousands, or even millions,  of dollars on  iPhone technology that would NEVER ever do an adequate job of translating information, let alone capture ASL signing.  So much for keeping abreast with the latest technology.

Guess this proves that King is really a CFA to the Deaf community and Deaf Education. (CFA is a Maritime term ”Come From Away” applied to those who are newcomers or visitors to the Maritimes provinces and know NOTHING about the area.  There are times when Maritimers complain that CFAs tell them what is best for them while knowing nothing about them.) Sounds familiar, doesn’t it, Newfoundlanders and Labradorans?

Category: Audism, Bilingualism, Deaf, Deaf Education  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  14 Comments
22
Dec

ICED 2010 Vancouver Documents

The www.ICED2010.com website that hosted the New Era Document is now closed. I asked the ICED 2010 committee who were involved in the development of the documents for permission to put the ICED documents here to be shared with everyone.

I thank Mr. Wayne Sinclair for sending me this PDF copy of the New Era Document, complete with signatures.  To read the PDF copy of the document that was signed by the ICED 2010 Vancouver organizing committee, BC Deaf community, Canadian Association of the Deaf and the World Federation of the Deaf, please click on the link directly below.

The ICED 2010 New Era Document

I  also offer my gratitude to Dr. Joseph McLaughlin for his willingness to send me PDF copies of the press releases that were made by the ICED 2010 Vancouver organizing committee.

Press_Release_Opening_Ceremony

Press_Release__Closing_Ceremony ICED 2010 VANCOUVER

Opening & Closing ceremony remarks on New Era_Dr. McLaughlin

For information on the history of Milan 1880 Resolution and its legacy, please go to the link below:

Milan 1880 History



Category: Audism, Bilingualism, Deaf, Deaf Education  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  3 Comments
23
May

Got Neutrality?

A commenter in my previous blog  referred me to a glossy website, Communicate With Your Child with the claim that this  website provided unbiased information from many various organizations.  She suggested that I click on “My baby has a hearing loss” section, which leads the viewer to various states that we could research.  She stated “Neutrality is now in the works. It still exists.”  

Is this commenter correct? Does this website actually provide unbiased information from many various organizations?  Has it got neutrality?

 Let’s analyze this website:

1. Count the number of times the words “hearing” and “hear” have been used on the homepage alone.  Total: 11!

2. Count the number of times ASL as a term is used on that same homepage. Total: ZERO

Talk about subliminal messages!

Now, let’s use this checklist to dissect the contents further:

a) Is t bilingual? Check! (English with Spanish translation)

b) Is it trilingual? Mais non.  Nowhere on this website do I see ASL translation.  
c) It has audio for those who may have reading issues: Is it accessible for the Hearing? Check!
d) FOCUS: the ability to hear words and songs. Check!
e) FOCUS: the ability to see ASL words and poetry. Where? Zilch and nada!

I checked “My Baby has a hearing loss” and clicked on states as instructed. This is what I found:

 The number of hearing loss professional organizations like AGBADHH, NICDC, Hearing Association, Let them Hear Foundation, etc etc far outweigh the number of Deaf-centered, or at least ASL-friendly organizations.

 I also clicked on http://www.raisingdeafkids.org which is on the list for any of the states you click on: Go to Communication choices, then you will see:

- Auditory-Oral, (Emphasis: Hearing/speaking)
-Auditory-Verbal (Emphasis: Hearing/Speaking)
-Bilingual-Bicultural- ASL and English (Emphasis: Bilingual Language Development)
-Cued Speech (Emphasis: Hearing/speaking)
-Total Communication (signing and talking with voice simultaneously… Emphasis: still hear and speak)

Consider the evidence submitted above.  One cannot help but reach the following conclusion:

 There’s an overwhelming emphasis on hearing and speaking, and little focus on ASL.  Therefore, this website is NOT unbiased.  It’s in fact heavily biased in favour of the hear-and speak ideology.  It’s got NO neutrality.

 But it’s sure got audism.

Category: Audism  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,  6 Comments
02
May

Neutrality: Does It Exist?

Neutrality: the absence of a declared bias

In other words, neutrality means having no opinion and declining to take sides.  ”I’m neutral about this. I refuse to take an opinion. Here are the options, and each has equal viability.   I take no stand either way.”

Does this type of neutrality exist in reality? No.  It’s unheard of.  Really.  Each, and all, of us has a bias, a philosophy in life that we follow.   My own personal bias is simply this: ASL and English are of equal value.  To be Deaf is great.   I do not want to be hearing at all.  No thank you very much.   I like the way I am now.

Now, if you want to look at biases,  take the hearing loss professionals who claim to be neutral as an example.  These professionals are audiologists, speech pathologists, medical professionals who work with newly-diagnosed Deaf babies, early childhood educators.   These people say, “Oh yes, we provide all options neutrally, and lay them out for the parents to look at.”  (True, ASL is included, but in such a way that it is not  emphasized, and overwhelmed by the array of other options. ASL is offered, but usually as a last option. )

SEE, Cued Speech, AVT/CI, Signed English, etc… all those options are geared for the development of the English language with emphasis on the hearing and speaking component,.  Even Signed English places emphasis on the hearing and speaking as it includes voice, mouthing as well as signing.  So does Simultaneous Communication and total communication that are included in the wide array of options.   ASL, although seriously underemphasized, is offered on the table for the overwhelmed and bewildered parents to ponder.

Of course, the parents would go for the options that support the development of the English language solely.  They would go for what is familiar to them: hearing and speaking.  For further explanation on how the system is stacked in favour of the monolingual, hear-and-speak ideology, view Don G’s excellent vlog.  That vlog shows that neutrality is nonexistent when it comes to offering options to parents of Deaf children.

If you want actual evidence that the hearing loss professionals are NOT neutral, just take a look at the large number of Deaf children that end up in the mainstream setting with cochlear implants, and taught to speak.  Look at the smaller number of Deaf children that are enrolled in Deaf schools.   That, to me, indicates a definite bias on the part of the hearing loss professionals who influence parental choices that impact their Deaf children.

Further evidence of that bias can also be seen in the recent passage of AB-2072 in California.   Here is the link to this article that proves that neutrality DOESN’T exist on the part of the professionals behind the writing of AB-2072.

REMEMBER: There is no such thing as neutrality in real life!

Category: Audism  Tags: , , , , ,  80 Comments
18
Mar

Challenging Audist Language (and Slurs)

1.

“I can’t hire you beause you’re deaf.”
“It isn’t a safe environment for someone with a hearing loss”
“I can’t promote you to supervisor because of your hearing loss.”
“ASL is a “fun language”, less important than English.”
“I can’t rent this apartment to you because you’re deaf.”
“Deaf people must learn English (forget ASL) because when they grow up they will have to function in the hearing society and need it to find jobs, find happiness and have a full and useful life.”

(Malkowski. The Canadian Hearing Society Magazine. Spring/Summer 2003 and Malkowski.Removing Attitudinal Barriers and Audism in Policy and Practice. 2010)

2.

“I can’t hire you because you’re black.”
“It isn’t a safe environment for a woman”
“I can’t promote you to supervisor because of your Jewishness.”
“Spanish is a “fun language”, less important than English.”
“I can’t rent this apartment to you because you’re Iraqi.”
“ Immigrant people must learn English (forget Spanish) because when they grow up they will have to function in the [American] society and need it to find jobs, find happiness and have a full and useful life.”

Which set of statements would get people outraged, and upon what grounds? The second set, of course, because they are either blatantly racist, or sexist.  The outrage would spill over into the media, in government buildings, in human rights tribunals.  Many in the majority group would side with women, racial groups on this, and justifiably so.

Yet, the silence is resounding when it comes to the first set of statements.  They are blatantly audist.  How many people would speak up? Admittedly, my choice of words in the first and second sentences of this paragraph could be construed as audist .  This just goes to show just how pervasive this type of language is in this society.  To wit: I obtained Mike Schmidt’s permission to use his vlog from Facebook.  This vlog will show exactly how pervasive the negative perception of the Deaf is, and how the term deaf has such negative connotations:


In his vlog, Mike called for a change in the use of language when it comes to the term deaf, and I agree that it is necessary to challenge the audist language as applies to us Deaf and Hard of Hearing people.  The language as shown in text in Mike’s vlog are actually deaf slurs, in the same vein as racial slurs.  This language reflects the attitudinal bias, which is audist in nature.  Audism is so similar to racism in attitude, and is reflected in discriminatory language and behaviours that uncannily resembles those of racial discriminatory language and behaviours.

During his March 10, 2010 presentation, Removing Attitudinal Barriers and Audism in Policy and Practice, Malkowski calls on us Canadians to challenge the attitudes and discrimination using both the following pieces of legislation:

  • Ontario Human Rights Commission’s Policies and Guidelines: Policy and Guidelines on Racism and Racial Discrinination
  • Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act,

both significant Human Rights legislation pieces in Canada, made stronger by the fact that Canada just became the 82nd country to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in New York.

Category: Audism  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,  11 Comments
16
Mar

What is Audism? Part II: The Effects of Audism

THE EFFECTS OF AUDISM:

As I stated in Part 1 of  the What is Audism? series, you cannot explain what audism is, without describing the effects of audism on Deaf and Hard of Hearing individuals, and the Deaf community as a whole. Again, this information came from Malkowski’s presentation.

I will now give a few of the effects that Malkowski mentioned during his March 2010 presentation:

Audist beliefs result in intentional or unconscious audist behaviour, such as:

  • treating Deaf children with oral skills differently – more positively – than Deaf children with sign language skills (i.e. in the classroom, in extracurricular activities, sports and recreation.)
  • systemic discrimination
  • negative stereotypes, misconceptions and myths regarding the abilities of Deaf and hard of hearing children, students, employees, social citizens.
  • dehumanization by medical and educational establishments (i.e. the focus on a deficit model or pathological view of hearing loss.
  • lifelong impact on children’s ability to acquire and understand English or ASL or both  (Malkowski, 2010)

To illustrate the systemic discrimination, and negative stereotypes, misconceptions and myths regarding the Deaf/Hard of Hearing, I remind you readers of Amy Cohen Efron’s DVD, which began as a vlog: The Greatest Irony.   In that DVD, she described the irony in allowing Hearing babies to learn ASL while Deaf babies are denied access to ASL, especially by those in the AVT profession.  Malkowski mentions this irony as well in his presentation, saying that ASL is accepted, and viewed as beneficial for Canadian hearing children’s early development and yet viewed as detrimental to the development of Deaf children (Malkowski 2010).

The effects of this misconception in addition to the dehumanization of the Deaf by the medical and educational establishments are clearly described in Malkowski’s research article on audism in the January 2009 edition of The Canadian Hearing Report, page 28-30:

“it is still common practice, for example, for audiologists, speech-language pathologists, early intervention and early childhood education providers, educators of deaf children, boards and government ministries to discourage deaf children from learning and using their natural and accessible language – sign language. In fact, many parents of deaf children who are making decisions around their child’s education are still not given balanced information about the benefits of sign language. This restriction of the use of sign language. coupled with a fundamental belief that a deaf child should learn to use residual hearing or the hearing that is a result of a cochlear implant and learn to speak is the most blatant form of audism.

Sadly, when spoken language, both expressive and receptive, is not accessible, precious time is wasted. The child is labelled a spoken language “failure” and the window of opportunity to acquire language quickly closes. Unfortunately, these spoken language deficiencies can be identified as a learning disability. In some cases there is no cognitive disability; in others, learning disabilities are compounded by language deficiencies. In both instances, it is too late for the language deficit to be repaired and this can have enormous associated costs in terms of special education requirements, and long-term mental health issues, among others. A great number of professionals – audiologists, interpreters, educators, speech-language pathologists, and medical practitioners– have enormous amounts of power and influence.” (Malkowski, 2009)

Malkowski mentions that one of the consequences for  this practice of withholding ASL from Deaf children in favour of oralism, and isolation in the public schools is that there are now a higher number of solitary Deaf adults without contact or connections to the Deaf community at large.  This contributes to the long term mental issues mentioned in the quote above. (Malkowski, 2010)

For further examples of what audism is, and its effects on the Deaf and Hard of Hearing people, I strongly recommend that you view this DVD, Audism Unveiled, by Bahan, Bauman and Montenegro. This was shown during Mr. Malkowski’s presentation last week, and this will prove to be eyeopening for those who have never seen this movie before.

Simply put, audism is an attitude of prejudice and perception that it is better to be hearing than to be deaf, and that if one is Deaf, one must strive to fit into Hearing society as much as possible.  It is clear that audist attitudes and behaviours by the majority group do have negative effects on the mental, physical, emotional and educational well-being of Deaf and Hard of hearing people as individuals and as a minority group.  Thus, it is proven that audism as a term is valid, and must be addressed.

Category: Audism  Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,  8 Comments
11
Jan

Resistance is Futile: Part Two

This posting is in response to a commenter in my last posting, Resistance is Futile: You will be Assimilated, who stated that he did not see that much resistance from the Deaf community in relation to the cochlear implant, and that the cochlear implant industry did not use force whereas the Borg did.

I wasn’t referring solely to the cochlear implant in my last posting. In actuality, I was referring to the entire orchestrated attempts at a systemic level to assimilate Deaf children into the Hearing society, and to mold them into the ideal “Hearing” image or at least a facsimile thereof.

I agree with the other commenters that there IS resistance against the CI. I would qualify that sentence, and reiterate there is plenty of resistance, especially against the tactics employed by the oralist establishment.

Perhaps you aren’t working in a field that works directly with children or survivors of assimilationist attempts to get them to “listen and speak”? Many who are in the front lines working with these survivors will tell you horror stories of delayed language acquisition and related consequences due to the desire of the majority to get them to “listen and speak”.

Speaking for myself, I am against the IDEOLOGY behind the cochlear implant (and AVT) industry, which perpetuates the myth that Deaf children DO NOT need ASL because it hinders speech development. This is another attempt at linguistic genocide, and that is what gets my dander up.

Many parents want their children implanted “to give them the best in life that they can.” That is how many parents see the cochlear implant. Many do not understand the necessity for children to have VISIBLE access to language, and that is ASL.

Since the system is already implanting children OVER THE OBJECTIONS of the Deaf community, I used the term BORG to describe the oralist system. This establishment is a juggernaut… which steamrolls whether people object, get hurt or not.

As for the use of force:

“Borg uses force to assimilate other people (and destroy people that it considers obsolete) while the technology of cochlear implant does not use force itself on people.”

I beg to differ. Force comes in many different forms. One is obvious: Physical coercion and subjugation. There are more subtle and insidious forms, such as rejection, which can be emotional as well as physical. Indoctrination, and emotional/mental coercion, and especially fear, are other forms. These forms of force CAN be done with such finesse that people won’t see them coming until too late. Many AVT therapists have threatened to cross families off their clientele list if they signed with their Deaf children.

When implanted children do not show that they benefit from AVT programs, they get “weeded out”. This phrasing was coined by the mother of a certain blogger that no longer comes to DeafRead.com. These children are considered obsolete and swept under the rug while “successful” AVT children are showcased.

If those weeded-out children did not have access to ASL while attending AVT therapy, their optimal potential has been damaged if not outright destroyed in some cases. Language acquisition then becomes a race against time.

Now, I see cochlear implants as astronomically expensive and invasive hearing aids. However, there are quite a number of parents who get their children implanted, and STILL want their babies to acquire ASL. As long as the children DO actually grow up bilingual with a strong start for language acquisition…

My primary concern is that children have access to ASL, and are NOT hindered in their acquisition of visible, accessible language, and for me that means ASL, as well as another language, whatever that is.

As for your contention that we have not truly seen how the technology of cochlear implant will affect the Deaf Culture and ASL, the impact is ALREADY being felt in the front lines as I mentioned earlier. The cochlear implant is only ONE tool in the entire Oralist apparatus in its goal to eliminate ASL and make us forget that we are Deaf.

THAT is Borg assimilation in all its glory, with finesse added.

Postscript (Jan 11 at 7:15 p.m.):

REMINDER TO COMMENTERS:

You are all welcome to comment here, but I request that from now on, please address the topic at hand and refrain from attacking or labelling people personally when you disagree with a viewpoint that is being brought up.

Thank you.

Category: Audism  Tags: , , , , , , , , ,  10 Comments
« Previous Entries