Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!yale!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!14!James.Womack
From: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org (James Womack)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: ASL and Deafies
Message-ID: <15736@bunker.UUCP>
Date: 19 Nov 90 04:01:08 GMT
Sender: wtm@bunker.UUCP
Reply-To: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org
Distribution: misc
Organization: FidoNet node 1:300/14 - The Emerald Isle, Tucson AZ
Lines: 35
Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP

Index Number: 11828

[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]

Ann, 
 
Now let's move on to Total Communication. Total communication 
is a philosophy and not a method. You can't teach Total 
Communication to preschoolers as you suggest. The concept 
behind total communication is that an educator uses the 
communication method best suited for the child to foster that 
child's learning. 
 
If a kid came to you knowing only how to read and write, had 
no signing ability , lipreading ability, that is what you 
used.  If the kid was primarily a lipreader that is what you 
used.  Total Communication by virtue of what it truly is 
unworkable. If we had the resources and teachers to go one on 
one with each kid to meet their needs, fine. We don't. We 
dump them all in one classroom. Consequently, it is 
physically impossible for a teacher to teach all the kids 
together by using total communication. Each kid's needs are 
different.  You can group them together according to 
communication needs, but they may be so dissimilar in 
academic level that you would be hindering the process of 
some, overwhelming others etc. Their social maturity or the 
presence of other factors would also make lumping them 
together purely according to communication needs prohibitive, 
yet this is what happens if you insist on a total 
communication approach as defined by your apparent 
suggestion. 

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!14!James.Womack
Internet: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org