Not always necessarily in “bottom” positions but if they want to show everyone they’re doing their part, they would carefully hire Uncle Toms or puppets where the administration or those in power still pulls the strings.

I do not want to make any comments or I’ll puke. I am getting sick and tired of this old b*llsh*t and game many of these deaf schools play at the expense of deaf children’s language development.

They exploit naive and vulnerable hearing parents of a deaf child. Isn’t it any coincidence that they keep fluent/native ASL/English bilingual, especially from deaf family at bay by driving them out or not hiring them? They know these people wouldn’t be manipulated any other way to please administration’s goal. Often administration sees # of students as a money making business, thus putting $$ above the needs for quality of education and language. $30-$35k per a child school gets that enroll every deaf child. Do the math and it is parents we need to empower and work with closely.

Wanted to add a couple more thoughts about the European acceptance of bilingualism vs American acceptance of bilingualism.

I think that when one talks about “acceptance” of the bilingualism concept…one has to look at WHO is practicing it.

In other words, I notice that when it is ONLY hearing people who practice it, it’s totally fine in Europe and America. No big deal for anyone. After all, as you said, it’s just two languages being practiced and used.

But when it comes to Deaf people…all of sudden the standards are DIFFERENT.

All of sudden, it is not OK for Deaf people to be fluent in both ASL and English.

Why? Again, it all comes back to the use of ASL itself…hearing people who do not want Deaf people to use sign language will automatically resist the idea of bilingualism.

That’s why you never hear AGB, oralists, etc etc talk about bilingualism (much less support it!)…for them it’s all about speaking, writing and reading English, period.

And oh yeah, let’s not forget the status and power…bilingualism in Deaf education is too much of a threat to hearing people in power (at least those who don’t support ASL).

While bilingualism in hearing world is no threat to any hearing group…hearing Spanish, hearing Chinese, hearing English, etc etc…it’s all the same for them.

As for Deaf…double standard exists.

Take a good, careful look, Jean…it’s there. (After looking, think about the recent protest…it was a power struggle as well. And take a good, careful look at the current makeup of the BOT…count how many hearing, how many deaf, and most importantly, how many know ASL, etc…and you will see that the power structure hasn’t changed. Don’t let the new additions of BOT fool you.)

If I had been there, I would have supported you publicly when you made your statement. So best I can do is to support you from afar in Indiana! :-)

What those two people told the group is b*llsh*t…their statement is clearly designed to please people who either don’t know ASL or have weak ASL skills.

A true bilingual would have BOTH native or high fluency in BOTH languages: ASL and English, period.

It also applies to any two other languages…i.e., a bilingual could be native or have high fluency in BOTH Spanish and English, for example.

Doesn’t matter which two languages…as long as you do both equally well, which is the whole point of bilingualism.

Katherine, I sense you and I are on the same page when it comes to Bi-Bi and schools, etc, so this is more of my agreeing and supporting you and educating others (so if I am spouting stuff Katherine knows, it’s really for others’ benefit!).

To continue: if a person has a native or high fluency in ONE language, and “little” of another language (whether it is ASL, Spanish, etc), then that is NOT bilingualism. It is just…that person is MONOLINGUAL who happens to have picked up a little of another language as a second language.

I also agree that when checking out “Bi-Bi” schools, one must look into things like: how many teachers/staff actually use ASL, what the school says about Bi-Bi on their website/brochures/newsletter, etc, how many Deaf people are employed at that school and in what positions, etc etc etc.

Like Katherine, I, too, have seen some schools call themselves Bi-Bi when in reality they’re not, so one has to do her/his homework before selecting that school.

Karen Mayes is right. It did take ISD several years to make their Bi-Bi curriculum/program a reality.

I was told by a *very* reliable source that it wasn’t just researching, discussing, etc that slowed things down.

The #1 thing that slowed things down the most was, of course, RESISTANCE by some of existing staff to the concept of Bi-Bi.

The reason for the resistance?

Power structure!

Think about it…if you say ASL and Deaf culture are now going to be primary focus of any curriculum or program, it immediately threatens the old guards (i.e., speech, audiology, etc etc).

Certain people have learned that the only way to win in the area of converting any school to Bi-Bi is to do is SLOWLY…and that means lots of talk, lots of tearing down the resistance, etc etc.

Can’t just set up Bi-Bi stuff overnight and expect hearing people, old guards, etc to be happy giving up their status and power.

A side note…Jean, I am not so sure that Gallaudet had “no bilingual problem” pre-Jordan…many people might have signed, yes, but I was student at Gally from 83 to 86 and I do remember too many of cafeteria staff, DPSS, etc barely signing at all, and I do remember many teachers didn’t use ASL–they used Sim Com.

Clayton Valli wrote about this in one of the NAD Monographs…I think it was 1990 and he titled it “ASL: A Taboo in Gallaudet Classrooms” (or something like that…I’m going by memory as I’ve already packed all my books in preparation for moving on Dec. 1st!!).

Anyway, go to Gally library and read Valli’s article…he wrote it back in 1990, and it’s very good and right on target.

It takes time… ASL DOES NOT HAVE academic standards like English has. CAEBER and several institutions are working on developing academic standards for ASL now. I can honestly say that my daughter who is in 1st grade is doing very well… reads at 2nd grade level, writes poetry, has an inner understanding of the rules of English syntax (noun first, verb second, adjective next), and her teacher gives the class challenging spelling every week (last week the spelling words were mathematics, science, communication, language arts, to name several.) So some of the teachers (not all, unfortunately… but then most of the schools have both excellent, good, average, and lousy teachers and ISD is not an exception) have high expectations and has a good understanding of how bilingualism works and my daughter’s teacher is one of them, so we are lucky. Plus, there are three computers in her classroom in which the students observe the signer signing short stories in ASL and the students are encouraged to write down what the signer says, developing the writing. So my daughter and her classmates are developing strong bridges between ASL and English now. I am just using a few examples of what a typical first grader learns at ISD, other than following Indiana Academic Standards in science, social studies, etc…

We also have to keep an eye on some crooked deaf schools/programs that claim to practice bi-bi when in fact they do not. This only further gives the name of bi-bi a bad name.

I had to choke and wonder if it’s true. Two people from this school told everyone in the group that CAEBER said that a balanced bilingual can mean that a person knows little of ASL and native in English or vice versa. I wholeheartedly disagree and got the flak when speaking out. What do you or others consider to be balanced bilinguals? Inquiring mind wants to know.

P.S. I am not sure if it is CAEBER’s own words or these two people from school who went misunderstood or changed the wording to please the audience.