Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!bunker!hcap!hnews!300!14!James.Womack
From: James.Womack@f14.n300.z1.fidonet.org (James Womack)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: Multiple Uses Of Sign
Message-ID: <17905@bunker.UUCP>
Date: 28 Feb 91 16:08:12 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: 58
Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP

Index Number: 13754

[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]

Jay, residential schools indeed serve a valuable function. Without
them, many deaf people would never have come to the realization of
a self-identity. We would have not that special deaf someone, we would
not have come together in numbers enough to form organizations and
clubs to meet our social and psychological needs to be among "our own"
where a free flowing burden-free method of communication could happen.
We would not have picked some of the most mundane aspects of life that
mean so much in mainstream society when you add them up together.

Mainstream programs, the waythey are used today, are committing genocide
against the Deaf Culture. They isolate us, suppress deaf people's chances
to master a language natural to us (ASL) and consequently, limit the
overall world knowledge and experience of the deaf. Thisis done by
the focus on speech as the main medium of education. 200 years of obvious
failure withthe majority of the deaf students is ignored andthis restrictive
medium continues to be imposed on deaf people and restricting the acquistion

of knowledge by deaf people. It also restricts the acquisition of a
1st language on which the 2nd one can be built so that the child can
actually master to some degree the language used by mainstream society.

Residential schools indeed isolate the deaf, but they also make the
deaf more self-aware and givethe child a true self of self-identity
AND expose that child to a greater awareness of the social truths in
hearing society as they apply to him or her.

Mainstreaming? If only it worked the way it should. In Tucson, we have
several public schools that work with us. We had a boy who was a whiz
in math. The deaf school could not challenge him enough. He was sent
to Amphi where they had an accelerated program. During part of the
day, he came to the deaf school for his language and reading needs.
We have a girl who is super lipreader (rare actually) and a doggone
good writer and reader. Matter of fact, she functions so high, the
SAT cannot test her (PHS level). She goes to CDO ( I think) for advanced
language and literature courses and comes to teh daef school for focus
in math (she is weak in this area) and her social needs (as determined
by her counselor). Here it is ! True mainstreaming. Public and residential
school working in conjunction for the Betterment of the CHILD instead
of butting heads over eduvational philosophy and all that horse manure
that does nothing but squeeze the kid in the middle while ignoring
the specific individual needs of the kid. If mainstreaming could be
done this way, fewer deaf people would end up being bitter about mainstreamed
programs andthe concept would actually work!!!!! That along with providing
the deaf child with a first language natural to deafness which is relevant
to "eye" input as opposed to "ear" input.

I have said it before. Teaching English from young age to a deaf child
is like teaching a blind person red. English is phonetic. Meant for
the ear. You might as well tell a blind person to open his mouth wider
inorder to "see" red.

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