You keep saying I am “denigrating English”. At first I thought you meant the English language itself. But now I see that when you say I’m “denigrating English,” you really mean I’m not in favor of oralism, mainstream or any program that doesn’t use ASL.

If that’s the case, then yes. I certainly don’t favor any school or program that would focus heavily on *AUDITORY learning* over *VISUAL learning*. Auditory learning employs the deaf student’s weakest point, which is her/his ears or hearing. Visual learning employs the deaf student’s strongest point, which is her/his eyes or vision.

Expecting a deaf student to obtain her/his education via auditory learning only sets that student up for a overall frustrating and difficult experience with education, and that is what I don’t favor. I favor COMPLETE ACCESS to education, and that is through ASL.

I can testify that Michele K. is right about English being alive in the deaf schools (nowadays Bi Bi method is being pursued in more deaf schools, after seeing that it WORKS.) In fact, due to my daughter having mild to moderate hearing loss and having some good English background, I did question about mainstreaming her but decided against it because her first language is ASL (she is just 6 years old.) I learned from my son’s TOD (my son is mainstreamed due to his having a strong background in English… his first language is English) said that it would be more work for TODs and public schools if the younger child is mainstreamed with little knowledge of English and strong ASL background, since most of mainstream schools do not have the programs for deaf children (with Bi Bi methods.)

Bi Bi philosophy aside, I did notice that you spend a lot of time on the history. I am not going to dwell on the history, nor use the history as an excuse for the “failures” (both real and imagined); what is important is NOW and FUTURE. We are rolling up our sleeves to do our best to see that our deaf children THRIVE in the bilingual education settings. We can salute our deaf history, being thankful for what it has taught us, and move on.

Bert, as you can see, my English is flawless. I was raised in a school for the deaf and I have been signing ASL since I ws 4 years old. So I know from personal experience (and from observing others) that ASL does not by itself cause a person to have poor reading/writing English skills.

I am not sure how much you know about the state of education for deaf people, but ALL schools (be it residential, mainstream, oral, etc) spend a lot of their time and energies on teaching English to the deaf.

So I know that English is alive and well in the world of deaf education. The only reason ASL has now been brought in the limelight is that oral schools and mainstream programs have not successfully produced high numbers of deaf graduates with strong English skills. Therefore, people are trying other methods (which include Bi-Bi philsophy and using ASL as a teaching tool) in an attempt to increase the numbers of deaf students graduating with strong English skills.

Bert, with all due respect, I don’t see Michele *ever* denigrating English. That part of your argument is without foundation.

Using EMG’s quote classifies you as an old man (I’m guessing 70s or so) and not only that, it classifies you as someone who doesn’t want to use ASL in classroom, which is very unfortunate.

ASL does belong in classrooms. ASL does belong in business meetings. ASL does belong in homes. ASL does belong in offices. ASL belongs anywhere you want to be.

Your continued denigration of ASL does not make you a friend of Deaf culture. Shame on you.