The Efficiacy of ASL/English Bilingual Education: Considering Public Schools
THE EFFICACY OF ASL/ENGLISH BILINGUAL EDUCATION: CONSIDERING PUBLIC SCHOOLS
The study investigated the efficacy and viability of American Sign Language (ASL)/English bilingual education for public schools serving deaf and hard of hearing children.
Literacy Skills among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students and Students with Cochlear Implants in Bilingual/ Bicultural Education
LITERACY SKILLS AMONG DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING STUDENTS AND STUDENTS WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS IN BILINGUAL/BICULTURAL EDUCATION
Research has shown that many deaf students do not develop age-appropriate reading and writing abilities. This study evaluates the literacy skills of deaf students, hard of hearing students, and students with cochlear implants in bilingual/bicultural schools in Denmark.
Will the Courts Go Bi-Bi? IDEA 199Z the Courts, and Deaf Education
WILL THE COURT GO BI-BI? IDEA 1992 THE COURTS AND DEAF EDUCATION
An innovative ifistructional philosophy in the field of deaf education—bilingualhicultural (hi-bi) education—is likely to raise new questions for courts to consider in interpreting the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This article reviews past litigation concertiing the education of children who are deaf or hard of hearing and explores the new language of IDEA '97 as it affects communication issues for these children. Arguing that IDEA '97 and the 1999 implementing regulations make it more difficult for schools to ignore the primary language and preferred mode of communication of children who are deaf the authors speculate that courts may be less likely to view language and communication modes as educational methods and, therefore, less likely to defer to the decisions of school authorities than in past court cases.
Literacy Development in Deaf Students: CaseStudies in Bilingual Teaching and Learning
LITERACY DEVELOPMENT IN DEAF STUDENTS: CASE STUDIES IN BILINGUIAL TEACHING AND LEARNING
A bilingual model has been applied to educating deaf students who are learrung American Sign Language (ASL) as their first language and written English as a second. Although Cummins's (1984) theory of secondlanguage learning articulates how learners draw on one language to acquire another, implementing teaching practices based on this theory, particularly with deaf students, is a complex, confusing process. The purposes of the present study were to narrow the gap between theory and practice and to describe the teaching and learrung strategies used by the teachers and parents of three elementary school children within a bilingual/bicultural learrung environment for deaf students. The findings suggest that strategies such as using ASL as the language of instruction and making translation conceptual rather than literal contribute lO literacy learrung. Findings further indicate that some inconsistencies persist in applying a bilingual approach with deaf students.
The Importance of Quantity and Quality of ASLwith Young Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children
THE IMPORTANCE OF QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF ASL WITH YOUNG DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING CHILDREN
A critical part of parental advocacy is being informed. Sometimes this means educators must stay on top of research and share what they learn with parents. This may be especially important in the case of research on early language exposure.
Ideological Barriers to American Sign Language: Unpacking Linguistic Resistance
IDEOLOGICAL BARRIERS TO ASL: UNPACKING LINGUISTIC RESISTANCE
The nature and status of American Sign Language (ASL), although long settled as linguistic matters (see Hoffmeister 2008; Liddell 1980, 2003; Lillo-Martin 1991; Lucas 1990; Neidle et al. 2000; Sandler and Lillo-Martin 2006; Valli, Lucas, and Mulrooney 2005), remain popular topics subject to serious misunderstandings and misrepresentations among nonlinguists, as the opening epigraph demonstrates. As Ronald Wardhaugh has noted about language in general:
Language plays an important role in the lives of all of us and is our most distinctive human possession. We might expect, therefore, to be well-informed about it. The truth is we are not. Many statements we believe to be true about language are likely as not false. Many of the questions we concern ourselves with are either unanswerable and therefore not really worth asking or betray a serious misunderstanding of the nature of language. Most of us have learned many things about language from others, but generally the wrong things. (1999, viii)
