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.