Return-Path: <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fADM8I025008; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:08:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 17:08:18 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3BF19712.5A4F1DC9@san-marcos.isd.tenet.edu> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Vicki Alford <vicki.alford@san-marcos.isd.tenet.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-LD:3769] Re: Deaf, communication issues X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-type: multipart/alternative; X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) Status: O Content-Length: 4659 Lines: 111 --Boundary_(ID_QbpPoLjGOAXwwXsXs101vA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT KathleenBombach@aol.com wrote: Spoken language is also linear, so hearing people have a basic congruence between speaking and reading. Deaf people do not. So reading for the deaf is like learning a very, very foreign language, and actual cognitive structures for deaf people have to be changed for written language to make sense--an extreme form of 'code switching'. It can be, but doesn't have to be. That is why our Regional Day School for the Deaf has adopted a communication philosophy that supports using Signing Exact English. This sign system provides students with an almost "exact" representation of English "through the air." I have used it for 9 years and believe it is the reason why our students in our program do so well with reading and writing. Our students read above the national norms. Vicki Sue Miller wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: S E Kirk [mailto:S.E.Kirk@durham.ac.uk] > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:18 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: [NIFL-LD:3767] Re: Deaf, communication issues > > In January this year I completed an MA dissertation on psycholinguistic, > educational and political aspects of literacy and deafness. It is an area > I am extremely interested in. > > I am particularly against the 'hearing-centred' bias in Deaf education and > the 'linear' methods mentioned in the discussion messages on this forum; > especially given the success of the bilingual-bicultural approaches of > Sweden and Denmark, where Deaf teachers, and thus visuo-spatial, > 'non-linear' methodologies, are central to the development of text-based > literacy. > > Does anyone have references for, or knowledge of, Deaf methods of teaching > - of moving from Sign to text, rather than from English (etc.) to text?? > It seems clear to me that only through the participation, research and > expertise of native signing teachers can effective strategies for the > teaching of reading/writing be developed... > > .Is this happening anywhere, does anyone know?? > > Steve Kirk. --Boundary_(ID_QbpPoLjGOAXwwXsXs101vA) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html> KathleenBombach@aol.com wrote:<i></i> <p><i> Spoken language is also linear, so hearing people have a basic congruence between speaking and</i> <br><i> reading. Deaf people do not. So reading for the deaf is like learning a very, very foreign language, and</i> <br><i> actual cognitive structures for deaf people have to be changed for written language to make sense--an</i> <br><i> extreme form of 'code switching'.</i> <p>It can be, but doesn't have to be. That is why our Regional Day School for the Deaf has <br>adopted a communication philosophy that supports using Signing Exact English. This sign <br>system provides students with an almost "exact" representation of English "through the air." I <br>have used it for 9 years and believe it is the reason why our students in our program do so well <br>with reading and writing. Our students read above the national norms. <br>Vicki <br> <p>Sue Miller wrote: <blockquote TYPE=CITE>-----Original Message----- <br>From: S E Kirk [<a href="mailto:S.E.Kirk@durham.ac.uk">mailto:S.E.Kirk@durham.ac.uk</a>] <br>Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:18 PM <br>To: Multiple recipients of list <br>Subject: [NIFL-LD:3767] Re: Deaf, communication issues <p>In January this year I completed an MA dissertation on psycholinguistic, <br>educational and political aspects of literacy and deafness. It is an area <br>I am extremely interested in. <p>I am particularly against the 'hearing-centred' bias in Deaf education and <br>the 'linear' methods mentioned in the discussion messages on this forum; <br>especially given the success of the bilingual-bicultural approaches of <br>Sweden and Denmark, where Deaf teachers, and thus visuo-spatial, <br>'non-linear' methodologies, are central to the development of text-based <br>literacy. <p>Does anyone have references for, or knowledge of, Deaf methods of teaching <br>- of moving from Sign to text, rather than from English (etc.) to text?? <br>It seems clear to me that only through the participation, research and <br>expertise of native signing teachers can effective strategies for the <br>teaching of reading/writing be developed... <p>.Is this happening anywhere, does anyone know?? <p>Steve Kirk.</blockquote> </html> --Boundary_(ID_QbpPoLjGOAXwwXsXs101vA)--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:28:05 EST