RSD Town Meeting (3/23/2006)
Post Discussion:
What are your opinions and/or questions about RSD Town Meeting?
What's wrong with RSD?
Many of us have complained about Rochester School for the Deaf. We need a common place to vent our concerns with each other without revealing ourselves to RSD to protect our jobs and children.
68 Comments:
I am in the process of posting my notes at the message board. I'm breaking it up into sections so hopefully it's easier to read -- plus you can see the earlier sections while I'm still working on others.
One section is up. By the time this comment gets approved and posted, more should be there.
Please wait to post replies until I've finished all the notes. I'd like to keep the notes all together.
Thanks.
(If Dr. Mowl decides to distribute copies/notes of that PowerPoint, some of my notes will be redundant... but that's okay.)
Silly me, I hit the wrong button with that last post. Oh, well...
The notes from the meeting are finished. Click the link in the top comment to view.
(I recommend right-clicking and opening in a new window. I think Apple-click works for Macs.)
Dr. Mowl's Response:
"RSD requires achievement of expected SCPI level for all staff. (Briefly explains SCPI) Teachers are required to have Advanced level. Some staff with less contact with students may have lower requirement." (copied from the Bi/Bi website set up by a RSD teacher)
----
My Response:
There is an important distinction between sign language and ASL. SCPI evaluates a teacher's sign language skills, not his/her ASL skills. Those who use sign language often borrow English syntax, grammar and semantics, whereas those who use ASL follow ASL syntax, grammar and semantics. Unfortunately, it is observed that some falsely claim that they use ASL when they actually use sign langugage.
The phrase "sign language" is truly vague. Here is one far-fetched, but possible interpretation of this phrase: A RSD teacher can use sign language not native to most RSD students such as Japanese Sign Language in his/her classroom.
=======================
Dr. Mowl's Response:
Deaf Teachers: 20%
----
My Response:
Deaf and Hearing Teachers with Superior/Superior Plus SCPI rating in the Early Childhood Center where the most critical period of language acquisition occurs: ???
(ASL is the most accessible language for many ECC students, regardless of the hearing status of their parents)
While it is true that the ECC teaching assistants are ASL role models for ECC students, they have no say and control over the ECC curriculum that does not really address the needs of ALL students.
=========================
My General Reaction to Town Hall Meeting # 2:
I commend Dr. Mowl's decision to establish two committees that will address many emotionally-charged issues facing the RSD community. We are off to a good start, but the last speaker is right to caution that our FIRST challenge will be to make sure that the criteria of selecting members to serve on these two committees are fair and appropriate.
I reread my last blog entry and noticed that I inadverently left out some information related to this point: Deaf and Hearing Teachers with Superior/Superior Plus SCPI rating in the Early Childhood Center where the most critical period of language acquisition occurs: ???
I meant to say:
% of Deaf and Hearing Teachers with Superior/Superior Plus SCPI rating in the Early Childhood Center where the most critical period of language acquisition occurs: ???
"Section 3: Dr. Harold Mowl: Student Accomplishments"
I want to congratulate the students who won the sport champions and academic bowl. Their parents must be very proud of them.
I need to be clear that I have no problem with the student’s accomplishments.
I have a problem on how Dr. Mowl used his students. This town meeting #2 was serious business between parents and Dr. Mowl and the board of the directors. I was so embarrassed for RSD community that he used his students as his “human shield”. He dragged them into this situation in his attempting to distract us from the serious issues we raised in the town hall meeting #1. Excuse me. I was so disgusted with him. The board of directors should be embarrassed too. If they did not, they are not human beings. We should start to worry about RSD overall.
If you want to make the point that the students did speak out in the town hall meeting #1, they did for themselves.
Me, either. I was so sick to death!
Section 2b: Dr. Harold Mowl: Education
Quote from Dr. Mowl: "We want our students to become bilingual. That's the goal. We want staff to be good role models in both languages."
HOW is it possible? Total Communication is being used by the teachers in the classrooms. It tends to “dumbing down” both ASL and English languages then prevent children from attaining fluency in either language. The quota from Dr. Mowl did not match with his action for the years.
CDP
I was so disappointed that there was very little time available (10-15 minutes) for questions and answers. Some questions were raised and went unanswered. I would like to propose the town hall meeting #3 very shortly. So that it would allow more time for all involved people to discuss until they are competely satisfied. I am not satisfied!.
In typing up those notes, one thing jumped out at me. There were a ton of different issues to be addressed... more than you can really handle thoroughly in one sitting.
I'm hopeful that the committees being formed will be useful in breaking things down and hashing it out more thoroughly, and in a more focused way, separating the issues. The committees might be the opening of a door.
Super Joe, I understand your frustration and disappointment with some things going unanswered. But when I think about it, I realize I don't want one man up there making a unilateral decision on-the-spot.
Also, "time for all involved people to discuss until they are completely satisfied"? Do you realize how many hours upon hours that would be? And some people may never be satisfied. Even lawyers in appellate court have a time limit.
I'm not saying everything's going to definitely be sunshine and roses from here. But considering the bulk of the material, it's a decent start.
CDP said: Total Communication is being used by the teachers in the classrooms.
Let's be clear about what you mean -- you're talking about SimCom. (Total Communication is this theoretically nice-sounding idea that turns into SimCom in practice.)
We've been having a nice conversation about SimCom over at Starving for Access. You might want to come have a look.
Meanwhile, are you saying that ALL teachers are using SimCom in the classrooms? Because that's not true. Are most? I couldn't tell you -- I haven't done a door-to-door check.
But I don't recall anyone at either meeting actually bringing up SimCom. ASL specialist(s)? Yes. Speech/communication teachers? Yes. Wanting a bi-bi program? Yes. But if anyone specifically said, "I don't want teachers using SimCom anymore," I must have missed it.
As for my own personal thoughts and questions about SimCom ... you'll have to go to Starving for Access to read them, because after all that typing yesterday, I'm not repeating myself. ;-)
Re: IEPs
Let me second what one mother said about teachers being willing to work with you on IEP goals. I would love to have parent input on the goals I write for my students.
I can't imagine any teacher NOT welcoming the input... as long as it's a true collaboration. Not one side saying, "This is what it will be, PERIOD!"
I already know I have a different perspective on my students than their parents do ... it's always nice to find out about the sides of the kids we don't see every day in class. I respect what parents know and understand about their kids, and I hope they likewise respect my knowledge and expertise in my field of education.
NEW YORK EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
WHERE ARE OUR RIGHTS FOR DEAF AND HARD HEARING STUDENTS?
OUR URGENT MEETING!
We need our PARTIPCATION and HELP! Can we set up our meeting! Where or when?? First of all, we must do to do something with NYS Education Department. We need to contact/hire someone who could write the laws and know the regulation relating to Special Education. We could ask all deaf schools parents and deaf community in New York State to particpate! WE MUST DO IT. All deaf schools follow the NYS regulation and laws.
We need to focus on few major issues:
1. IEP (Deaf parents have rights to support and choose ASL language and development for their deaf child instead of auditory and speech)
2. Eliminate the 80 dB hearing loss due to RSD policy and NYS Education Dept (?) Deaf and hard of hearing students have rights to enroll in any deaf schools in NYS and also summer program. Hard of hearing student can enroll if she/he wants to meet social need/education need.
3. Enforce all school districts to accept and send deaf and hard of hearing students to deaf school due to their social/education needs when hearing/deaf parents request.
4. Define BI-BI.
WHY NOT WE CAN DO THE ACTION AND CHANGE OUR DEAF EDUCATION AND LAW!
A lot of the IEP, special education details parents may want to know about comes from the Federal IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). Like most laws, it can be confusing and overwhelming to read.
Someone at Starving for Access turned me on to this link:
Note that this is from 2000, and my understanding is that there were some amendments or revisions in 2004, but I'm still looking into that.
The nice thing about this site is that it discusses aspects of the law specifically as they relate to deaf children -- we all know this situation is in many ways different from special education in general.
It's broken down nicely into sections, and there are FAQs and other links or resources at the bottom.
I'm still seeing if I can find anything so user-friendly related to New York State laws and regulations.
I believe (and someone correct me if I'm wrong) that SOME states allow greater parent choice in schools, such as not having any minimum hearing loss requirement.
Weird, when I previewed my last post, it worked right, but somehow the link coding got screwed up now. (It must be Friday...) Too bad our posts here aren't editable.
Let's try this again.
Here's the link:
Hello Everyone:
First let me tell you how proud I am of all of you. Dr. Mowl included (though I have never met him) and your Board of Directors (ditto). Really, as frustrated as some of you might be (nod to Super Joe), it DOES say something about the people you're working with when they say "okay, keep the blog going, and let's set up committees..."
It IS a step in the right direction, is all I'm saying. You could be bumping into people who are going "NO! NO NO NONONONONO!" So just keep that in mind.
I'd like to ask you some questions now, if you don't mind. Number one, MWKK, regarding the last paragraph of your post above...
I would really really really like to know if anyone knows HOW parents... brand spanking-new parents of deaf kids, are steered twoards one school or another in the state of NY? I mean, okay... logically (and please, parents, at any time speak up okay because I'd really like to know) I assume that something happens and they begin to suspect their child is deaf, right? So they go to a doctor, who makes the referral to an audiologist... fine. But then what happens? How are they... hm... I don't know how to say this right... where do they go to figure out what kinds of things their kid is going to need over the years? How do they even learn about school choices, etc? I'm assuming there must be some kid of outreach program in NY state? Or do parents sort of just stumble around until they find things, or...? Parents, if you could explain this to me, it would help.
The point being... what you want is the earliest language exposure possible, right? THAT is the problem, along with whatever is happening in the schools. A child's neurological pathways for language acquisition are wide open and running on overdrive between the ages of 0-3, so that's the prime time for exposure to easily accessible, GRAMMATICALLY ACCURATE language. In otherwords, Bi-Bi.
But if you don't get the parents WAAAAYYYYY earlier than when their kid enters kindergarten, then you have problems.
So logically you want to get ahold of those outreach people and get THEM on any committee you form regarding Bi-Bi... see where I'm going with this..?
So how does that work in NY?
(I'd like some parent input if possible... reply anonymously if you'd like but you have the best experience with the process..)
The 2nd town hall meeting was a start in right direction. There were just too many issues for one night. I feel thirsty for more town hall meetings.
I hope the two actions will develop more committees to work on specific issues.
I thought Mowl and Morse said that there will be more town meetings twice a year?
Nice idea: CSE with Deaf parent representative - it was weird to have a parent representative from our school district and who was a total stranger and obviously not deaf.
We need parents' rights in RSD handbook (keep easy to read please).
NEW YORK EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
WHERE ARE OUR RIGHTS FOR DEAF AND HARD HEARING STUDENTS?
OUR URGENT MEETING!
We need our PARTIPCATION and HELP! Can we set up our meeting! Where or when?? First of all, we must do to do something with NYS Education Department. We need to contact/hire someone who could write the laws and know the regulation relating to Special Education. We could ask all deaf schools parents and deaf community in New York State to particpate! WE MUST DO IT. All deaf schools follow the NYS regulation and laws.
We need to focus on few major issues:
1. IEP (Deaf parents have rights to support and choose ASL language and development for their deaf child instead of auditory and speech)
2. Eliminate the 80 dB hearing loss level due to RSD policy and NYS Education Dept (?) Deaf and hard of hearing students have rights to enroll in any deaf schools in NYS and also summer program. Hard of hearing student can enroll if she/he wants to meet social need/education need.
3. Enforce all school districts to accept and send deaf and hard of hearing students to deaf school due to their social/education needs when hearing/deaf parents request.
4. Define BI-BI.
WHY NOT? WE CAN DO THE ACTION AND CHANGE OUR DEAF EDUCATION AND LAW!
Parents:
RSD teachers have been busy preparing your children's IEPs. You will be contacted by your children's school districts for CSE/CPSE meetings very soon.
At the 2nd Town Hall meeting, one parent shared his story about removing speech therapy for his child. Dr. Mowl was clearly not happy that this story was shared publicly. This parent's story shows that if you don't want speech therapy at RSD for your deaf child(ren), you have the right to ask for it to be removed!!!! The LAW is on your side. I learned that some parents were stunned by this parent's story. They have been advised by some RSD staff members that speech therapy for their children was required. WOW! They have been misled.
I personally believe that one important, and probably fastest, effort to get ASL specialists back to RSD is to demand removal of speech therapy from your child(ren)'s IEP.
Let me make myself clear. I'm not opposed to speech therapy. It has its place in Deaf Education. This message is for some parents who think speech therapy has been a waste of time or hasn't been helpful. I had 17 years of speech therapy at RSD. I looked forward to my speech class to catch up with my classmates! All we did was to fool around, giving our speech teachers a hard time. Today I am unable to speak like a hearing person.
RSD Speech/Communication teachers' favorite argument is that they don't always work on your children's speech skills! Please don't be deceived by this argument. Instead, review your child's IEP to see what your child's speech/communication teachers have proposed to do with your child.
This message is for hearing parents from a deaf adult who represents the view of many deaf adults. You need to be honest about your child's speech abilities. Will your child be able to carry a conversation like a hearing person when he/she graduates from RSD? Your child's chances of succeeding in the hearing world are much, much better if they are taught written English via ASL. Look at Dr. Mowl as an example. He has no speech skills, but he's a literate deaf adult. Why? His native language of ASL helped him acquire written English skills. Unfortunately, the common misconception of speech as the only predictor of future success in reading and writing persists.
RSD Teacher
Thank you very much for your time posting these important pieces of information from the meeting, they are valuable to the parents who could not attend.
I have but one concern...when I read your notes at the message board, the ones where you quoted some deaf participants at the meeting, as much as I hate to admit your lack of fluency in translating from ASL to English. This makes me wonder about your receptive skills. I hope you recognize your weakness and continue working to improve your receptive skills.
Nonetheless, I do appreciate your priceless support for ASL/English bilingual education. Many thanks for sharing with us your notes from the meeting.
Re: my ASL-English translations,
Honestly, to keep up and get as much detail written down as I could, I had to rely on the voice interpretation that was happening. I was able to catch a couple details that were different when I glanced up, so I tried to throw those in.
So please don't consider my notes as any kind of reflection of my receptive skills -- just as my limitations of trying to look two places at once. :) Naturally, though, I'm always working to improve my skills.
If anyone who attended the meeting remembers any specific details that are missing or were misinterpreted, please let me know, and I'll be happy to edit them in the notes.
And you're certainly welcome.
“NEW YORK EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
WHERE ARE OUR RIGHTS FOR DEAF AND HARD HEARING STUDENTS?”
Yeah, we need to get together to do some researches and find more about our rights. There are so many things we don’t know about. Maybe, we need to chip in to find the legal counselor to assist us with the legal questions. I think it is time for us to get together and find out more. I agreed with this writer who suggested focusing on the four issues (IEP, Eliminate the 80dB hearing loss level policy, send deaf/HOH students to deaf school when requested, and define BI/BI).
I think we need to get together and brainstorm on the solutions. I suggest we need to get together at Rochester Recreation Club for the Deaf (RRCD) again and discuss without the board of directors and Dr. Mowl being there. We need to feel free to express our concerns or ideas without being threatened by Dr. Mowl.
“I personally believe that one important, and probably fastest, effort to get ASL specialists back to RSD is to demand removal of speech therapy from your child(ren)'s IEP.”
This is very good idea. What do you think? We should get busy and demand to remove the speech/communication from your child’s IEP. You can always put it back in when we accomplish our goal.
CDP
MWKK,
Please avoid the term "hearing impaired." It focuses on what a deaf/hard-of-hearing child CANNOT do (hear). It is not a politically correct term. Instead, use labels "deaf" or "hard of hearing."
I respectfully disagree with you that RSD has a WONDERFUL ECC program. Its curriculum and teachers tend to observe the pathological (medical, audiological, speech, etc.) model more than the cultural model. The only aspect of the cultural model seen in the ECC program is that they have many deaf teaching assistants. Again, they have no input in the ECC curriculum. In other words, I wouldn't be surprised if they see teachers using wrong signs, but they cannot correct these teachers as it is not their job to do so.
It all boils down to this: There is NO BALANCE between the PATHOLOGICAL MODEL AND the CULTURAL MODEL in the ECC.
“So I am consistent with keeping him in speech therapy, lipreading skills, etc. In case you are wondering about his academic skills, he is AHEAD in his academics skills.”
Mwkk
Look! I’m talking about the majority of Deaf children who does not have the ability like your oral son. All the speech therapy, lipreading skills, and other kind of mouth motion therapy don’t always work on them. What will you do about it?? Are you making sure the majority of the Deaf children pay the heavy price for your oral son to be ahead in his academics skills?
In my previous comment, I said “we should get busy and demand to remove the speech/communication from your child’s IEP. You can always put it back in when we accomplish our goal.” It is up to you if you don’t want do it. That’s fine with me because that’s your decision. You don’t have the right to drag us down when we want to speak out for our rights to have our native language to be used in the classrooms instead of the hallways, restrooms, cafeteria, and other places.
CDP
Hello...
Above, Annie said: "I like that one comment about having the parent committee to meet the new parents of deaf children to go over many issues so they wouldnt be overwhelmed and misguided. Simple to read Handbook is very good one too."
Yeah. I've been reading a lot of research lately on HOW hearing parents of deaf children react to the process of having to gather all of this information and make all of these overwhelming choices. And I wonder if maybe the best people to guide new parents through the process are OTHER PARENTS.
I have my own beliefs about what should be done for deaf children, no matter how much functional hearing they might have. I believe in Bi-Bi. I'll admit that right up front. But I also recognize the necessity of presenting ALL the information in a neutral and unbiased manner. So a handbook would be nice too, and if you had a parent organization of some kind, you would probably already HAVE parents who have made different types of choices for their children (for example, the choice to mainstream their child, send their child to a residential institution, focus on ASL, focus on lip reading, etc). Maybe you could have a handbook that, after it finishes explaining each type of choice, had a list of parents' contact info. Different people could volunteer to explain different things.
You could do this all by yourselves, and you could put it on a website and link it to whoever you wanted... RSD's website... you could contact the organization that represents all the audiologists in the state and have a meeting with them and the audiologists to refer parents to your website... the possibilities seem limitless, in my opinion.
Plus that kind of approach will get you much further than a lot of other parents are getting in other states. It seems to me that many schools don't even TELL parents what Bi-Bi even IS. Likewise, the outreach programs in these states. It seems that if the schools aren't using Bi-Bi, then why even mention it, you know? It's all very fine and well if ISD is using it but they're 800 miles away... that's what the mentality seems to be.
I think you could take this approach all on your own and not even have to worry about what NY laws are while you do it. All you're doing in essence is gathering info and building a website and building a committee and a handbook. Freedom of Speech. The better a job you do, Google will bump you to the top of the search list. Parents will find you all on their own as the word spreads.
Somebody above listed as part of your four goals that you would need to "define Bi-Bi." That sounds very interesting. What are you guys thinking about doing? How would you like to approach that goal?
As the 2nd town meeting ended few days ago, many parents or people felt unsatisfied because they were not given a chance to ask questions. Most of us are now stuck with many questions.
Anyone thinking about setting up a 3rd Town meeting with Dr. Mowl and Board of Directors? This will give all of us to ask them questions before the AD Hoc meetings are set up. Anyone agree with this?
MWKK,
Although I don't know your child and his class, I can safely argue that your child has been receiving appropriate attention at RSD at the expense of other students only if they are users of ASL and don't benefit from oral instruction.
Ample research shows that SimCom compromises clarity of communication. There should be a policy in place at RSD in which ALL teachers attempt to address the needs of BOTH groups -- Oral students and ASL students. One way to do this is to have teachers not use their voice for one part of the day and use it for the other part of the day (morning: ASL; afternoon: simcom). This is not an ideal solution, but it would be significantly better than what is actually practiced at RSD (SimComming all day) now.
As the 2nd town meeting ended few days ago, many parents or people felt unsatisfied because they were not given a chance to ask questions. Most of us are now stuck with many questions.
Anyone thinking about setting up a 3rd Town meeting with Dr. Mowl and Board of Directors? This will give all of us to ask them questions before the AD Hoc meetings are set up. Anyone agree with this?
----------------------------------
I DEFINETLY agree with this. I am sure everybody else out in the community agrees too. To those people who set up the first town hall meeting, Please set up the town hall meeting again.
Need to know the requirements for the special teacher certification and licensing?
Certification and licensing requirements for bilingual special education professionals
Easy to read
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act '97: An Informational Website for Parents of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children
You must see this cool site.
I.E.P. Pop-Up: Click on the quote to see good responses and support for your responses.
ASL/English?
New York State bilingual & ESL Network
Interesting! We need to avoid the mistakes the people make.
Special Education Advocacy: Mistakes People Make
Check the law firms for the special education
Special Education and the Law
Are you ready for the pop quiz?
Quiz: Differences Between Section 504 and IDEA
ANNOUNCEMENT
Special Education Law & Advocacy Training
Rochester, New York, May 17, 2006
I got this from I.E.P. Pop-Up: Click on the quote to see good responses and support for your responses.
We have a center-based program for our deaf and hard of hearing kids in this district.
and then you may hear something like . . .
Your child will have to use signed exact English. Our program (and/or) interpreter doesn't provide American Sign Language
Problem:
Over time, schools create programs for kids, and center based programs. Sometimes the philosophy of an administration creates a program that provides for only one mode of communication or method of teaching. Some school districts are large enough to provide several center-based programs, for instance an "oral" program at one school and a "TC" program at another school. Most school districts may have only one program in a school district which adheres to a certain philosophy or mode of communication. That is fine if the program meets the needs of your individual child. But if you are advocating for the needs of your child which are different from what the school district has typically offered, then you have to approach placement issues based on the individual needs of the child. This is often difficult if the school district has rarely looked outside the box. Stay focused on the needs of your child. Be very clear about how your child communicates and in what mode. When this has been addressed, then issues of placement and services are defined. In other words, the school district must meet your child's need on an individual basis; they can't just stick the kid in the "deaf" program.
Responses:
"I really think we shouldn't discuss placement issues until we have clearly defined Claire's needs based on how she communicates in the world around her. When that is agreed upon by our team, then we can discuss the setting in which her services can be provided most effectively."
“It’s kind of like asking a child who speaks Spanish, to sit in a French class, since it’s also a “foreign” language. The two modes of communication just don’t compare to one another.”
Sec. 300.552(a)(1) In determining the educational placement of a child with a disability, including a preschool child with a disability, each public agency shall ensure that the placement decision is made by a group of persons, including the parents, and other persons knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options.
Sec.300.346(a)(2)(iv) Consider the communication needs of the child, and in the case of a child who is deaf or hard of hearing, consider the child’s language and communication needs, opportunities for direct communications with peers and professional personnel in the child’s language and communication mode, academic level, and full range of needs, including opportunities for direct instruction in eh child’s language and communication mode.
20 U.S.C. 1400 (d) (1) (A) "to ensure that all children with disailities - get Wrightslaw quote from Sheryl
RSD knew that we do have the right to have our native language to be used in the classrooms. This is very difficult time for me to believe that there is a law which gave us the right to our own language instead of SimComm. This is very serious. Now you know you have been deceived by RSD for a long time. Now, what will you do about it??
Forgive me--going to be a long post.
I think that one part of the problem is that everyone is waiting for everyone else.
Today I received information that a group of people, mostly parents, had a meeting last week to discuss the prospect of setting up a charter school right here in DC, specifically so that they can get around the tangled mess of laws and policies that deprive their children of the education they want and need. The first meeting had a lot of arguing going on because nobody could agree on anything, and worse, nobody could believe that a given suggestion would work because this or that obscure law or policy would foul it up. And yet when pressed, nobody seemed to be able to quote these laws or policies to the letter.
This isn't an isolated occurence. This is the fifth state that I personally have heard of in which people are getting together in frustration and anger to talk about these things. And yet on and on it brews, with no overall national movement taking shape.
What does that suggest to you? To me it suggests fear. We want change, but we want easy change, change that doesn't involve confrontation or conflict or risk. So long as it DOES involve those things, we want somebody ELSE to take those risks. I wonder if there isn't a part of us that wants to be able to point at anyone who stands up and blame that person for whatever might go wrong, because that way we can sink back into a crowd of nameless, faceless, and numerous "victims." It's almost as if our victimhood has become our last real strength, because that's the only place left to hide.
And that's just dumb, this fear of change and the things we do to each other to avoid risk. Change is messy by its very nature. Change in its initial stages is unrestrained and unpredictable. Like right now. Where will all this lead? Nobody knows, so everyone is set on edge.
The irony is that the more meetings you have, and the harder you work, the more concrete your wishes and desires will become, and thus the more defined and predictable the changes you want will become. The real threat that people are probably so afraid of isn't in these meetings or in clarifying goals... it's in leaving those desires and goals here, right where they are... unclarified and undefined and brewing around and threatening to boil over any day now.
The way I see it you've got two issues to get past. One, you speak under anonymity, and thus nobody knows each other. That's too bad, because that decision deprives you of leaders. It leaves you in the position of having to say: "Hey, to the people who set up the first Town Hall Meeting, can you set up another one?" That's kind of like speaking in the middle of a dark room, unsure of if anyone is there to hear you, or reaching out in darkness to fingerspell into somebody's hands, but you don't know WHOSE hands.
Second problem: as I said above, everyone is waiting for everyone else. Why does somebody ELSE have to set up a meeting? Why can't YOU set up a meeting? I mean that with respect... I'm not trying to accuse you of laziness or trying to make you angry. But this is where inertia and apathy come from... waiting. You've got all these links to laws, research, policies, etc. You've made what sense you can out of them alone. You've got a whole ocean of people out there who would also like to see something done. And then you've got the people who are encouraging and pushing, asking you what you're going to do about it, asking you what you WANT.
Take a step forward. Volunteer. Call that club or whatever you were talking about before (that Deaf club) or call Dr. Mowl and see if you can reserve the same auditorium you had your last meeting in. Toss around a few suggestions for dates for the meetings here in this blog. There are all kinds of things you can do, just STOP WAITING. You don't have to be reckless, you don't have to come in itching for a fight. Refusing to wait anymore doesn't mean you're impatient or unprofessional or rocking the boat. You can set up a meeting AND still be cooperative, trustworthy, mature, sane, whatever. You can push for change AND still be the kind of person everyone would be proud to have running your school or teaching in it or raising a child who goes to it.
I'm thirty-six years old. I have thirty more years to contribute to this field. How about you? I want to be a father myself and if my child is born deaf, or hearing for that matter, I want him to be safe and well-educated. How about you? Why is these things so bad? I don't blame any ONE person for the way things are--it's useless to do so and it wastes valuable energy I could apply elsewhere. But I'm also no fan of our current reality, and every time a deaf child ANYWHERE graduates with a fourth grade reading level, I see it as an easily-preventable tragedy... if only we could get enough people together to start preventing it.
So stop waiting, if that's what you're doing.
Please.
Sorry... third to last paragraph: "...why ARE these things so bad...?"
Typo.
Okay... Lets just say it like it is.
1. Last Thursdays meeting was like commercial for RSD....And did not resolve many of the parents and students issues and concerns.
2. Committees are great ways of resolving some of these issues and developing an action plan for RSD future....But, how long is it going to take for these committees to formulate solutions. The answer is months if not YEARS.
3. The immediate question about hiring an appropriate ASL specialist was skirted around by Dr. Mowl. Is RSD actively searching to find an ASL specialist? I have a feeling the answer is NO. Dr. Mowl agreed with the mother who spoke at the 2nd town meeting about the need for an ASL specialist however he never said he was going to hire one.
4. I feel like our concerns are being Stalled by Dr. Mowl. In the public school when issues arise they are resolve quickly...Not poseponed to meeting that begin in 8 - 10 weeks from now.
5. I do believe that Dr. Mowl spent a lot of time organizing his presentation.... however, Parents needed more time to ask questions and express concerns.
6. The issue with the Gym teachers inapproriate behavior in September. It is March...Why has the new staff handbook taken so long to develop and share with Parents. In the public school this would have been developed and communicated to families with in a few weeks.
7. Parents, we need to attend the next PTA meeting and keep push for these issues to be resolved NOW....while the pressure is on the adminstration to make changes and listen to what our kids need.
8. As I read the blog I see so many GREAT suggestions. Why don't we meet again and brain storm solutions and make some purposals to the board and Dr. Mowl.
What Do You think... Should there be a Town Meeting Part III?
What has been done yet about the parents' handbook? Who have been selected to review the handbook? How were they selected? Have the committees as propoosed by Dr. Mowl been set up yet? If so, who are the members of these committees? How were they selected?
A very concerned mom,
You got it! Those are my sentiments exactly.
CDP
Several things are very important:
1.) You need to have a core group that meets frequently and is responsible for keeping track of all the "promises" and the changes. This group also sets up town hall meetings. Try to have different people in your core group-- a parent, an advocate, a teacher or other school staff. The core group need not be larger than 4-5 people. This group will also serve as a "central" communication network. Very important. In other words: who is your leader?
2.) Print everything. Document everything. As a core group-- and on your own-- carefully examine what is said, what is agreed to -- and what is not. Watch for smoke screens. Do NOT let them control the "tempo" and "timing" of things. This is a procrastinating, red-tape tactic and you do not want to get stuck in that. That is why the core group is so important-- this group will set the tempo.
3.) There has to be honest, open discussion from people inside of the school (students, staff, and parents). They are the ones who see the truth.
4.) Do your reseach. If something is possible, and the school is refusing to cooperate-- then you have a lot of leverage. If you don't have anythng to "back" your comments, then the school will succeed in blocking you.
5.) Communicate. Don't stop communicating. Keep the pressure on. Use the local media, use this blog, use email. This sort of exposure creates tension-- but tension is necessary for change. It is the one thing we were most criticized for in Michigan but it is the one thing that got the ball rolling as fast as it did.
Remember, we are behind you. Talk to us-- there is great discussion happening here. SCPI vs. ASLPI. Sim Com. Total Communication. ASL Specialists. Students being used as a buffer. All that is important to discuss-- because by educating each other, we are removing fears and increasing awareness-- in essence, empowering each other. Keep it up.
Remember, when we unite and collaborate-- we achieve great things. And this scares the hell out of "them"
Alison
I would like to add... you can form a "core group" initially through friends you trust. That will help with the fear too. Gradually what will happen is that your friends will bring in people THEY trust, and your group will soon double. Meanwhile you'll have time to talk with these new people and learn their views, so you won't be thrown into the middle of anything overnight. If several such groups start up, that's okay too... you can connect later. Maybe you will have many similar issues, and maybe you will differ on a few points. That's great if you do... the differing points might be something you've never thought of before, and plus they represent a "range" of what the community finds acceptable. If YOU can compromise on your differing issues, so can your school.
Another approach you could take would be to put out a call through this blog. Have a meeting. Pick a date and a time and stand on that. If some people can't make it, that's okay--they can make the next one.
Remember that we're behind you and we're impressed with your progress thus far. Really, you've done a lot. Congratulate yourselves on that. But MUCH MORE remains to be done.
(I posted the above comment by the way not Alison... I'm sorry my computer froze up and crashed while I was sending the comment)
OA#8
For your information; I got this from Starving For Access
Hunger Strike: A Response to the Deaf Education Crisis
Monday | April 03, 2006
So... What now???
Don’t let the lack of big news deceive you. We have been doing a lot of things lately, laying the groundwork for upcoming events.
Michigan Deaf Association recently passed a motion to Rally at the capitol on May 17th, 2006. The platform issues will be 1.) Bringing an ASL/English Bilingual Education option to Michigan, and 2.) Pushing for legislation on the Deaf Child Bill of Rights. Some of us will be driving out to show our support. They will be matching the Michigan Hearing Loss Association in funds for a day at the capitol, where both groups will be encouraging the State to focus more on Deaf and Hard of Hearing issues (which have been sadly neglected for years).
So, Folks… Hold that date. May 17th. Make a long weekend out of it. Come to Michigan and bring your progressive spirit! We are seeing a lot of action lately—First with South Dakota School for the Deaf, then Michigan School for the Deaf. Now Rochester School for the Deaf is opening itself to possible changes and improvement. There is also indication that two other schools (we will not name them at this point in time) are planning on pushing for the same ASL-English, Audist-Free changes as we are hoping to enforce in Michigan.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Steven Morse, President of RSD Board of Directors
David Johnston, President of RSD Parent-Staff Association
Donna Ayer, President of RSD United Faculty Association
Gene DiVincenzo, President of RSD Staff Association
Eric Smith, President of JrNAD Chapter at RSD
Patti Canne, President of RSD Alumni Association
FROM: Harold Mowl, Jr.
RE: Advisory Committee for Effective Communication at RSD
DATE: April3, 2006
In the second Town Meeting on March 23, I announced that I would be setting up an
Advisory Committee for Effective Communication at RSD with representatives from the Board of Directors, School Administration, Parent-Staff Association, United Faculty Association, JrNAD, and Alumni Association.
The main purpose of the Advisory Committee would be to identify communication issues and recommend strategies for improved communication among the RSD constituents. It is my hope that the Advisory Committee will meet quarterly, with meeting minutes maintained and shared among the groups.
The first meeting will be held from 4:30 to 6 p.m. on Wednesday, May 24 in the Zwick Conference Center at RSD. An early dinner will be served.
I am asking your organization to consider becoming part of the Advisory Committee and to let my office know who your representative will be. You can send one or two representative to the first meeting.
Please let Gail Boorum, my Administrative Assistant, know by May 15 who from your organization will be attending the meeting on May 24. Her email address is gboorum@rsdeaf.org.
Thank you very much.
Note: The copy of Communication Philosophy is attached to this memo.
http://www.rsdeaf.org/about_communication.asp
MEMORANDUM
TO: RSD Community (Parents, Faculty, and Staff)
FROM: Harold Mowl, Jr.
RE: Communication Philosophy Statement COmmittee
DATE: April3, 2006
In the second Town Meeting on March 23, I announced that I would be setting up an
ad hoc Board of Directors committee to study RSD’s current Communication Philosophy statement and to recommend any change to the Board and me by September 1, 2006. The Committee would include representation by the Board, parents, administrators, faculty and staff, students, community members, and education professonials. I hope to have the Committee organized in early May.
A copy of the Communication Philosophy statement is enclosed for your review.
The purpose of the memorandum is for me to solicit names of people to serve on the Committee. If you are interested in serving on the Committee or if you have any suggestions, please send them to Gail Boorum, my Administrative Assistant, before April 28. Her email address gboorum@rsdeaf.org.
The President of the RSD Board of Directors and I will select people from the list of names for the Committee.
Thank you very much, and please let me know if you have any questions.
Attachment: http://www.rsdeaf.org/about_communication.asp
C: RSD Board of Directors
Wednesday, April 12th 2006
6:30 p.m.
You are cordially invited to attend our Parents Open Forum Night.
The evening will begin for all parents in the LRC at 6:30 pm sharp with welcomes by our PSA Acting President Mr. David Johnson.
The purpose of this Parent meeting is to share and add concerns/issues before the ad hoc Board of Directors committee sometime in early May.
*Interpreting service will be provided for this event*
and also Refreshments will be served
If you will be requiring childcare services, please contact Vicky Gutierrez to notify her to request childcare service for your child.
Please notify her by April 11th (Tuesday), 2006 in the am. Vicky can be reached by calling 336-5876 (voice/tty) or [ mailto:Vgutierrez@RSDeaf.org ]Vgutierrez@RSDeaf.org If you have any questions about childcare at RSD, please contact Chris Bradley at [ mailto:Cbradley@RSDeaf.org ]Cbradley@RSDeaf.org
Dear Concerned Members of the RSD Community:
This is a brief, but extremely important response to Dr. Mowl's memo to the RSD community dated 4/3/06. The purpose of this memo is to solicit nominations from the RSD community for service on the Ad Hoc Committee to revisit RSD's communication philosophy.
I was taken aback by the following statement: "The President of the RSD Board of Directors and I will select people from the list of names for the Committee."
As a citizen of this nation that is governed by and for the people, I believe this is a seriously flawed process. It is so obvious that the Board President and Dr. Mowl will choose individuals who have no and/or easily resolvable issues with RSD. The last speaker at Town Hall Meeting # 2 raised this same concern; he mentioned that some groups/individuals won't be well represented if we are not careful in planning our selection processes. Unfortunately, his prediction will come true unless we act soon. The selection process as described in the 4/3/06 memo is their process, not ours. The issues raised at town hall meetings will be downplayed and forgotten in no time if individuals with nonchalant and/or lukewarm attitudes about the quality of education at RSD are deliberately chosen by the Board President and Dr. Mowl to serve on the Ad Hoc Committee.
In closing, it is my observation that the selection process used by the Board President and Dr. Mowl for service on the Ad Hoc Committee is biased, unfair, and unjust. RSD is not Dr. Mowl's school. RSD is not my school. RSD is not your school. RSD is our school.
Regards,
Pamela R. Conley
Mother of RSD Student
Thats why I think Dr. Mowl suck big time! We need to replace Dr. Mowl with someone else who is willing to put in more efforts within the RSD community.
Dear Anonymous,
I know you are very frustrated with Dr. Mowl. Believe me, I totally understand. I am as equally frustrated as you are. However, Dr. Mowl should be given a second chance to prove to the RSD community that he is capable of making RSD much better than it is now. A well-known Deaf scholar told me that we should pity Dr. Mowl as he needs our help.
We all have to admit that Dr. Mowl has done many good things for RSD. There are awesome after-school activities for RSD students that were not offered in the 1970's. Also, even though he had not been responsive in the past, we all have to admit that Dr. Mowl is now receptive to our concerns. Otherwise, Town Hall Meeting # 2 would have never taken place. However, it was not made possible without the efforts of the creator(s) of this blog. So, in a way, I understand where you are coming from.
On the other hand, there are many things at RSD needing areas of significant improvement. For me, RSD's communication philosophy does not reflect the current trends in Deaf Education, so needs to be revised accordingly. Another problem that seems to be widely prevalent at RSD is audism; it means “the corporate institution for dealing with deaf people, dealing with them by making statements about them, authorizing views of them, describing them, teaching about them, governing where they go to school and, in some cases, where they live; in short, audism is the hearing way of dominating, restructuring, and exercising authority over the deaf community. It includes such professional people as administrators of schools for deaf children and of training programs for deaf adults, interpreters, and some audiologists, speech therapists, otologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, librarians, researchers, social workers, and hearing aid specialists” (Lane 1992: 43). Please remember that both hearing and deaf people can be audists. I personally think some forms of audism at RSD are unintentional. At a conference that I attended recently, Patrick Graybill, another well-known leader in the Deaf community, said that we are teachers for the rest of our lives. We MUST CONTINUALLY TEACH to dispel wrong assumptions, inaccurate perceptions, misinformation, etc. about our people. Otherwise, they will never go away.
So……..what we need to do now is to ask RSD tough questions. Also to challenge RSD to come up and implement innovative solutions for a variety of problems experienced by various groups within the RSD community. Let's do it one step at a time, but at an accelerated pace. If nothing changes within a given timeframe, then it'd be a good idea to consider your suggestion. What do you think?
Best,
Pamela R. Conley
Here is some scary information that has been hidden from us all.
deafreedom.com
Irrefutable Proof Bi-Bi does NOT Work! Quite a Shocker...
http://deafreedom.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1614
The educational program in question has been using the Bi/Bi program for ONLY SIX years before the tests were administered, so the person/poster's interpretation of the test scores is skewed. And, MOST IMPORTANTLY, deaf children need to be exposed to ASL from birth on to age 5 (better known as the "Critical Period" hypothesis by educators in Deaf Education)in order to achieve mastery in written English. Furthermore, a Bi/Bi program won't succeed if it is implemented at certain/selected grade levels.
Instead, please study educational programs (i.e. Indiana School for the Deaf) that have been using the bi/bi approach at all levels (birth-12) over a long period of time.
Bi/Bi Advocate
ISD, has never attended the training and even members of the staff themselves told me personlly this summer that they are a Bi Bi program in name only, They have not undergone the certification process. Looking at 6 years results of a school that changed to Bi Bi cannot be dismissed. There is no interpretation needed to see that those that have been in the Bi Bi program sing kindergarten at this school have filed worse then I thought was possible. Not one single student..NOT ONE....basic in English and only 1 in mathematics.
My understanding is that ISD does say they use the phlosophy but they never attended CAEBER for training and certification. I personally looked at the California STAR report and see that the most current year statistics are no better. It was just pointed out to me that the same thing has happened over the past few years at Maryland School for the Deaf. The changed from TC to Bi Bi and their literacy scores plummeted. This information seems to have been hidden by those who are pushing so hard for Bi Bi in Mich and RSD. I even read in the MSD blog so called Bi Bi experts claiming that every single student who ever was in a Bi Bi program graduated with college level reading skills. I knew that absolute was false but not it seems if even more was hidden.
"This information seems to have been hidden by those who are pushing so hard for Bi Bi in Mich and RSD."
Will you please quit making this sound like it's some kind of big conspiracy? There are problems with everything Oral approaches, TC approaches... everything. The difference between those approaches and Bi-Bi is that they have been around an have been in practice for decades. Bi-Bi has not (at least not in America). They've had more than enough time to prove their worth, but on a widespread basis they don't perform.
My challenge to you: let's get the kids early enough, and give them teachers who can separate the grammatical structures of ASL and English (and show bridges between them), and let's get the parents signing. THEN come on here and tell us you have irrefutable proof Bi-Bi doesn't work. Because right now the truth is that none of YOUR stuff works either, and despite that you are doing your level best to keep Bi-Bi off the stage ANYWAY.
Why? What causes you to hate it so much?
First of all, I dont hate it. It by your own admission is flawed and does not have a track record of success. I have a child in a TC school tht is performing off the charts. Is testing at colege reading and english levels at only 14 years old. He, along with 5 of his classmates that I know of,is all the proof I need that TC can work to. In California they tried your approach, children started from kindergarten and now with that calss in 6th grade, the results are horrific. Now, if this was your child who was used as a guinea pig as you suggest, how happy would you be if they were set back as far as these kids were while "trying" what you suggest? As a last comment regaurding the ASL/English connection..Dr Nover himself just last week said that ASL does not driectly insure the learing of English. The is the man that is the head of the CAEBER group and one who would now the most about the impact of his system.
Anonymous w/ a successful 14 year old,
ASL is a language, not a methodology. Of course it doesn't directly insure the learning of English. Nor does Spanish ensure the learning of English for hearing students whose first language is Spanish. That's why it's so ridiculous when people say "ASL is a failure." A language can't fail -- it just is.
Like I've said elsewhere, before you judge bi-bi based on the performance of a California school which has used it for six years (supposedly), we need to know WHAT exactly they've been doing.
Just a few thoughts...
Dear TC Advocate,
You mentioned that children in California started the Bi/Bi program at the kindergarten level. Legitimate research has shown, over and over again, that children are most likely to be better readers and writers if they are exposed 24/7 to an accessible language from birth to age 5. This particular period is better known as the "critical period" hypothesis. The problem with deaf children is that they have NO language during that period unless they are born to parents/guardians who use ASL. About 5 to 10% of deaf children in the U.S. come from ASL-using households. This estimate is probably even lower because not all Deaf parents use ASL. What about 90 to 95% of deaf children born to parents/guardians who speak English or other languages that are NOT ACCESSIBLE to them?
What particular strategies have you/your school used with your TC child that has greatly helped him/her succeed as a reader and writer? You didn't say. TC proponents do openly acknowledge the benefits of ASL usage for improving reading and writing skills in deaf children.
Regards, Pamela R. Conley
"...by your own admission is flawed and does not have a track record of success."
Actually, no. That's your interpretation of what I said.
It has a track record of success in some places. In others it does not. As RSD Teacher said, we need to look at HOW they are doing it.
This is what I consistently notice: people seize upon Bi-Bi's problems and then negate the whole system. But they don't do that to TC or any other method, even though those methods are riddled with problems and failures. They ignore all of that and say MY KID is doing well. That's good for your child and you, but it's not good for children who aren't doing well.
So the way I see it, for every argument you make against Bi-Bi, apply that argument to every other method. Don't just use your own child's success as your sole criteria for judging the effectiveness of a given program.
And finally, I never said anything about "guinea pigs." But I notice you did, Anonymous. Which makes the concept YOUR issue, and not mine. When you respond to what I actually said, and only what I actually said, without putting words in my mouth, then we'll have an intelligent debate. Until then, I will simply ignore you and talk with people who don't treat me that way.
Bi Bi is a method of teaching....i didnt say ASL was a method....if you want to split hairs on what I said or you said, then get it right before you say I am wrong. I am not a TC advocate or BIBI advocate. The rules you seem to make assumptions on go both ways. You say that those that question BiBi only want to look at the failures of Bi Bi and not the triumphs, isnt that exactly what people are doing when bashing TC, Oral or any other method? Thats the hypocracy of most of the conversations. People on one side or another only look at the facts or research which support their agenda. The call the facts that dont support their side, unproven or try to say that you are interpreting the results wrong. I am curious as you have brought up intellect now.....how would you interpret the results of 6 years of BiBi in a school that shows not one single student as proficient in Math or English under this system? Not putting words in anyones mouth, I would just like to see your words and not some "slick willie" dance around having to look at how its being done. If it has failed these students, do you think in the future their prospective employers or colleges ar going to look at their horrible test scores and say " we should really focus on how they failed" not that they failed? We know that is not the case.
Yes TC has its failures, Yes Bi Bi and Oral have their failures.....Their is millions that have failed to graduate from college, High School...or tho even be self supportive in this country. Deaf and Hearing alike. These are facts that cannot be disputed. There is no single cure all that will produce the results we all wish for every child. The fact is even hearing children has a horrid average reading level in the US of 7th grade. What I have a problem with is the people who trumpet Bi Bi as some miracle that will make all children have college level literacy as so many have stated in this blog and others.
mwkk,
I beleive that you are right about the parents issue. I thank you for that comment. This is where the true problem is and can be solved. To take a former political slogan....I guess you could say..."It's the parents, stupid!"
You can have any education model you want but if the parents cannot talk to their children, to guide them, nurture them, teach them, help them learn to read and communicate.......it will not matter what is happening at the school because at age 6 they already will have one foot in the rut towards illiteracy.
It is becoming extremely difficult to have a coherent conversation in here with so many anonymouses running around, but I'll try ...
One "anonymous" said:
Bi Bi is a method of teaching....i didnt say ASL was a method....if you want to split hairs on what I said or you said, then get it right before you say I am wrong.
This was perhaps in response to my comment:
ASL is a language, not a methodology. Of course it doesn't directly insure the learning of English. Nor does Spanish ensure the learning of English for hearing students whose first language is Spanish. That's why it's so ridiculous when people say "ASL is a failure." A language can't fail -- it just is.
I was responding to the following comment by possibly the same "anonymous":
Dr Nover himself just last week said that ASL does not driectly insure the learing of English. The is the man that is the head of the CAEBER group and one who would now the most about the impact of his system.
I admit, the "ASL is a failure" quote is something that people have been saying in a separate forum that was cited on the Starving for Access blog. I apologize if it seemed I was attributing that comment to you, but over the last few days, I've felt bombarded by this idea people have that ASL itself is an educational methodology.
I have never met Dr. Nover and wasn't there to get the entirety of what he said. The comment you attribute to him means nothing in isolation -- that was the point of my response. The fact that he said ASL does not directly ensure the learning of English means he has a solid grasp of the obvious. It seems he understands that simply putting ASL in the classroom isn't a magic bullet. (I agree, the way ASL is used to bridge to English is critical, and that has to do with teacher training, skills, and methods.) But your very next statement was regarding Dr. Nover's "system". According to what you wrote, Dr. Nover was talking about ASL. ASL is not Dr. Nover's system -- it is one channel used in his system to communicate and relay information.
I am not trying to split hairs; I am trying to "get it right." If we are still miscommunicating, by all means, please clarify.
This is my profession, something I've studied (and continue to study) in-depth. So I feel a responsibility to share my expertise with the community I serve to constructively work toward our ultimate goal -- the best possible education for these children. Parents know their kids, and I know education (and sometimes another "side" of their kids) -- that's why we need to work together as a team to figure it out.
Dear RSD Teacher,
Having known you better through this blog, I want you to know that you have earned my respect as well as that of those in the RSD community whose "voices" have been silenced for political reasons. I thank you from the bottom of my heart for advocating tirelessly for us.
I am truly hopeful that, if you are willing and able, you will be selected to serve on the Communication Philosophy committee. I know that you would make a great contributor.
Best,
Pamela R. Conley
http://www.joeybaer.com/gally/
Go to this blog to hear what one Gallaudet alumnus has said about schools for the deaf. Please be alerted that it may be signed in ASL without voice.
Hi MWKK,
Joe's blog shows that there are, indeed, many d/Deaf Americans who are deeply concerned about the overall quality of education in schools for the deaf, suggesting that this problem is not unique to RSD. To my best knowledge, there are growing grassroots efforts that are challenging schools for the deaf in South Dakota, Georgia, California, and Michigan to revamp their educational programs to make them more d/Deaf-friendly.
Pamela R. Conley
Why SimCom Failed
Warning: No voice in this video clip.
Joey Baer has three videoclips on his blog to talk about the candidates of the Gallaudet president.
Joey Baer ASL Blog
Some of them talk about the problems the deaf schools have.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
why SimCom failed?
He is mislead and he blamed on TC because he is very dummy.
It is unacceptable for one to call his/her opponents inappropriate names like "dummy." That's not how successful debates work. Please clarify what you mean by "he is mislead." Please defend your position. Readers of this blog need to understand why you are in favor of TC.
Proponent of Bi/Bi continued to control MSD will transform from TC to Bi-Bi; as a result, they felt humiliated and depressed. Proponent of Bi/Bi are afraid of telling the truth from hidden from the fact that Bi-Bi doesn’t work. I feel sorry for deaf young students who are TC and the fact that they are innocents. Deaf children are always beautiful and their parents give them who they have to choose to access education. In MSD, the young children were very confused what was going on. That’s reason that their parents of deaf child have to protect the proponent of Bi/Bi from threaten to TC and their parents of deaf children and tried to tell people who didn’t listen to them. It went worse and started a fight.
Bi- Bi and TC don’t work the same systems as well as they are not perfect. Identify that Bi- Bi is related to ASL/ENGLISH and TC is linked to ASL/WRITTEN are the same systems.
NO MORE WAR BETWEEN BI-BI AND TC.
#2
One thing …. TC includes manual, oral, auditory, written and ASL.
Post a Comment
<< Home