The articles assigned for this week are about ways to enable children to utilize their language skills. This is something that is generally thought of as an easy thing to do, however, many people, parents included, don't know how to enable children to use their language skills. The articles provide a sense of guidance on how to do that. A great way to do this is to converse freely with your children instead of simply asking a question, then giving the answer. Many parents don't realize that is what they are doing when they ask their children something. Whether it's patience, or not, parents often cut their children off without giving them an opportunity to provide an answer. The best way for children to expand their knowledge is to find the answer on their own, without the assistance of their parents. Of course, parents can provide guidance, such as how to utilize appropriate language skills in certain settings, but for the most part, children need to figure out the response on their own.
A great way for children to learn more is to establish a routine, but change it every once in a while. Children get bored with a routine, just like everyone else. They need something to stimulate their brain, therefore changing their routine can provide that stimulation. I think the idea of "self-talk" can actually play into this. When you switch up the vocabulary you use, using different words in different settings, constantly talking, the child's brain is more stimulated. I've always personally felt that children's personalities reflect the amount of conversational stimulation they received from their parents or home life. Self-talk is a way that conversation can be ongoing, and vocabulary can be easily attained.
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Saturday, February 14, 2015
Blog 6
I feel that the principles of language learning and language development are crucial in the overall understanding of language development. Obviously as a Deaf Educator, you need to know how children develop their language and what we, as teachers, can do to help them improve their language development. Deaf children come into life with a disadvantage in language due to the lack of hearing ability and communication skills, so it's really important to understand their current level of language and to know how we can build on it. Communication skills go hand in hand with communication competence. I have always felt that communication is not simply speaking a language with another person. It is knowing how to act appropriately in various settings, and how to communicate accordingly.
As a Deaf educator, students can use my examples to influence their communication skills in their own life. I can expand on my language, and use simultaneous communication as much as possible, so that they're receiving as much exposure as possible. We are essentially language models for them. We can assist with language goals, and plans on how to attain those goals. If necessary, we can intervene and change the goals. We can also be a source of support in other aspects that might influence their ability to communicate. Ultimately, we need to encourage communication skills, and provide the best influence as possible.
As a Deaf educator, students can use my examples to influence their communication skills in their own life. I can expand on my language, and use simultaneous communication as much as possible, so that they're receiving as much exposure as possible. We are essentially language models for them. We can assist with language goals, and plans on how to attain those goals. If necessary, we can intervene and change the goals. We can also be a source of support in other aspects that might influence their ability to communicate. Ultimately, we need to encourage communication skills, and provide the best influence as possible.
Sunday, February 8, 2015
Blog Post 5
Quite honestly, the readings for this week made me a little sad. While we would like to think that every parent wants the best for their child, especially with regards to language, that is not always the situation, as both articles pointed out. Siegel even writes "...the beginning of a millennium without communication, too many deaf and hard of hearing children have little or no language skills and limited communication access, both of which lead to social and linguistic isolation and high rates of academic failure." That breaks my heart. As a potential deaf educator, I want to think that all deaf children are born to parents who care enough about them that they would do whatever it takes to make sure they can communicate with their child. That is clearly not the case, though.
One would think that the law or IDEA would take into consideration deaf and hard of hearing children. While the IDEA seems to want the best for DHH children, an understanding that communication and language is central to effective education. The situation cannot simply be addressed by putting an interpreter in the classroom and assuming the problem is solved.
Monikowski discusses how there is a challenge in language development with both interpreters and deaf educators, because often times, a deaf child will be born to hearing parents who do not know ASL, and cannot therefore establish a good basis of English for their child. The interpreters and Deaf Educators assume that the child has a strong first language foundation, and will then be able to understand and acquire a second language. A good interpreter or deaf educator should take all students language levels into consideration. Some students are not going to be able to understand ASL because they don't even understand simple meanings of English words (or vice versa).
The article was absolutely correct in saying that "interaction between the student and the teacher is primary and it must be successful if the child is to succeed." Because the parents have essentially failed in establishing a base language, it is the interpreter's and educator's job to teach the primary language. This language has to be learned early on or else the child can face serious problems socially and linguistically later in life. I agree very much so with the the article in that "the important factor for learning is not the ability to speak, but the ability to communicate through language, whatever its form, from an early age." Whether it's home signs, or pointing at a book, then pointing at the word "Book," parents need to have some form of communication with their child or else they're setting them up for failure in the classroom and in other environments! The idea of parents not communicating with their children frustrates and angers me so much. I just don't understand how people can be so horrible.
There are many other factors to communication other than the actual language or speaking aspect. Again, as the article points out, "taking turns," having "speaking rights,"... all those things are also especially important when considering communication skills. Social skills are developed through communication by engaging through others. An interpreter and deaf educator cannot fix that problem on their own. All people involved in the child's life must be aware that they individually influence the child and can help language and social development. It's sad to think that many aspects of language are missed when only visual information is taken in. That is why it's so crucial to present language in all forms and in every opportunity possible.
Quite honestly, the readings for this week made me a little sad. While we would like to think that every parent wants the best for their child, especially with regards to language, that is not always the situation, as both articles pointed out. Siegel even writes "...the beginning of a millennium without communication, too many deaf and hard of hearing children have little or no language skills and limited communication access, both of which lead to social and linguistic isolation and high rates of academic failure." That breaks my heart. As a potential deaf educator, I want to think that all deaf children are born to parents who care enough about them that they would do whatever it takes to make sure they can communicate with their child. That is clearly not the case, though.
One would think that the law or IDEA would take into consideration deaf and hard of hearing children. While the IDEA seems to want the best for DHH children, an understanding that communication and language is central to effective education. The situation cannot simply be addressed by putting an interpreter in the classroom and assuming the problem is solved.
Monikowski discusses how there is a challenge in language development with both interpreters and deaf educators, because often times, a deaf child will be born to hearing parents who do not know ASL, and cannot therefore establish a good basis of English for their child. The interpreters and Deaf Educators assume that the child has a strong first language foundation, and will then be able to understand and acquire a second language. A good interpreter or deaf educator should take all students language levels into consideration. Some students are not going to be able to understand ASL because they don't even understand simple meanings of English words (or vice versa).
The article was absolutely correct in saying that "interaction between the student and the teacher is primary and it must be successful if the child is to succeed." Because the parents have essentially failed in establishing a base language, it is the interpreter's and educator's job to teach the primary language. This language has to be learned early on or else the child can face serious problems socially and linguistically later in life. I agree very much so with the the article in that "the important factor for learning is not the ability to speak, but the ability to communicate through language, whatever its form, from an early age." Whether it's home signs, or pointing at a book, then pointing at the word "Book," parents need to have some form of communication with their child or else they're setting them up for failure in the classroom and in other environments! The idea of parents not communicating with their children frustrates and angers me so much. I just don't understand how people can be so horrible.
There are many other factors to communication other than the actual language or speaking aspect. Again, as the article points out, "taking turns," having "speaking rights,"... all those things are also especially important when considering communication skills. Social skills are developed through communication by engaging through others. An interpreter and deaf educator cannot fix that problem on their own. All people involved in the child's life must be aware that they individually influence the child and can help language and social development. It's sad to think that many aspects of language are missed when only visual information is taken in. That is why it's so crucial to present language in all forms and in every opportunity possible.
Sunday, February 1, 2015
Blog Post 4
Assessment is always a tricky topic. When I was initially reading the introduction of the chapter, I reviewed the standards for assessments written by the International Reading Association and the National Council of Teachers of English. The standards seemed very well thought out and applicable to all students. Something that I did not know about assessments was that the IDEA "requires that students receive assessments but it does not specify the actual tests you must give." I'm personally not a fan of norm-referenced tests because I think that every student learns differently, and therefore tests differently. I was in the gifted program my whole life, but when it came to standardized testing, I tested poorly because I get horrible test anxiety. It doesn't necessarily mean that I don't know the material, I just don't test well. Because of this, criterion-referenced tests were more on my level because as the book states, they "do not specifically compare an individual's score to other people's scores. Rather, they measure an individual's mastery of content."
I never realized how many things you have to take into consideration when assessing deaf or hard of hearing students. I have somewhat of a problem with the main issues that are associated with assessing language of children with hearing loss. The main issues include the lack of skilled examiners, confusion over the use of deaf or hearing norms, and the lack of easily administered materials. My primary issue with those things is that how can the assessment be fairly graded when the examiner might not have any idea what he or she is doing? It's difficult enough for DHH students to be assessed, but if the assessment is administered by someone who is unfamiliar with the so-called "norm" of children with hearing loss, how can that assessment be fairly administered? It cannot.
When I was reading over the "interviews" of different types of evaluators, it was interesting how the answers were somewhat similar. I particularly agree with "Susan's Perspective" on when she evaluates her students. Instead of simply saying she evaluates them on the mandated evaluations and re-evaluations, she stated that she assesses them "all the time," and that "there isn't much time that goes by that I'm not thinking about what they are doing, what I am doing, and whether we have a good mix." I think to conduct a proper evaluation, considering how you work with your students is critical. Sometimes students may act differently when they know they're being evaluated, versus just being informally evaluated in their comfort zone.
Obviously, language assessment is more challenging when a student has a hearing loss. There are just so many factors you have to take into consideration that you might not consider with students who have no hearing loss. The overall concept of narrowing down what your content includes when evaluating the students is very important. You cannot expect them to know everything, therefore focusing on teaching them in-depth about one area of content, then evaluating them on that content area is the best way to approach evaluation in my opinion, and based on the readings.
When considering language and communication instruction, the book states that there are "many different communication approaches." As a teacher, you have to get to know your students in order to "determine the most efficient pathway in which the child encodes language." From day one, you need to informally assess your students and figure out their learning styles, what level of language they are currently on, their learning potential, how they best acquire language, etc. The teacher must also be capable of efficiently teaching the language in order to teach it to the children.
Assessment is always a tricky topic. When I was initially reading the introduction of the chapter, I reviewed the standards for assessments written by the International Reading Association and the National Council of Teachers of English. The standards seemed very well thought out and applicable to all students. Something that I did not know about assessments was that the IDEA "requires that students receive assessments but it does not specify the actual tests you must give." I'm personally not a fan of norm-referenced tests because I think that every student learns differently, and therefore tests differently. I was in the gifted program my whole life, but when it came to standardized testing, I tested poorly because I get horrible test anxiety. It doesn't necessarily mean that I don't know the material, I just don't test well. Because of this, criterion-referenced tests were more on my level because as the book states, they "do not specifically compare an individual's score to other people's scores. Rather, they measure an individual's mastery of content."
I never realized how many things you have to take into consideration when assessing deaf or hard of hearing students. I have somewhat of a problem with the main issues that are associated with assessing language of children with hearing loss. The main issues include the lack of skilled examiners, confusion over the use of deaf or hearing norms, and the lack of easily administered materials. My primary issue with those things is that how can the assessment be fairly graded when the examiner might not have any idea what he or she is doing? It's difficult enough for DHH students to be assessed, but if the assessment is administered by someone who is unfamiliar with the so-called "norm" of children with hearing loss, how can that assessment be fairly administered? It cannot.
When I was reading over the "interviews" of different types of evaluators, it was interesting how the answers were somewhat similar. I particularly agree with "Susan's Perspective" on when she evaluates her students. Instead of simply saying she evaluates them on the mandated evaluations and re-evaluations, she stated that she assesses them "all the time," and that "there isn't much time that goes by that I'm not thinking about what they are doing, what I am doing, and whether we have a good mix." I think to conduct a proper evaluation, considering how you work with your students is critical. Sometimes students may act differently when they know they're being evaluated, versus just being informally evaluated in their comfort zone.
Obviously, language assessment is more challenging when a student has a hearing loss. There are just so many factors you have to take into consideration that you might not consider with students who have no hearing loss. The overall concept of narrowing down what your content includes when evaluating the students is very important. You cannot expect them to know everything, therefore focusing on teaching them in-depth about one area of content, then evaluating them on that content area is the best way to approach evaluation in my opinion, and based on the readings.
When considering language and communication instruction, the book states that there are "many different communication approaches." As a teacher, you have to get to know your students in order to "determine the most efficient pathway in which the child encodes language." From day one, you need to informally assess your students and figure out their learning styles, what level of language they are currently on, their learning potential, how they best acquire language, etc. The teacher must also be capable of efficiently teaching the language in order to teach it to the children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)