NAD tells us parents what to do
Feb 02, 2008 @ 06:48 PM
Fortunately,
we're not listening (or, we're not heeding). We have
already seen the advantages of listening and
speaking. Here is a blurb from their statement:
"The NAD reiterates its position that acquisition of language from birth is a human right for every person, and that deaf infants and children should be given the opportunity to acquire and develop proficiency in American Sign Language (ASL) as early as possible."
To see the rest, go to nad.org.
Undoubtedly , language acquisition is essential for every human. However, it is doubtful that a child of hearing parents will become proficient in sign language (and therefore be able to think in complex ways) if the parents are not already fluent in sign language prior to their birth. Could I teach and expect my child to converse in Russian? And that is a spoken language. Most hearing people have no experience in visual language, besides the fact that it would take years to become proficient in any language. Meanwhile, the child's early developmental years would be ticking away... the sensitive period for learning a new language is birth to 12 years of age. Hearing parents of deaf infants have rarely learned ASL. They will not be fluent.
I chuckle when I read about an excited hearing parent whose child knows 20 (or 30 or 100) sign words at age 2. Do you know how many words a child typically should know at that age? And, what kind of sentences they should, developmentally, be able to formulate? It doesn't get easier, either-- the 6 year old learns 6-10 NEW words a day. Will the hearing parent be able to learn and teach that many sign language words? More than likely, they will be left behind. Eventually, the child whose primary language is ASL may not be able to communicate well with their own family.
My kids hear just fine with their cochlear implants, and so, they have learned and can speak fluently in the language of their family.
"The NAD reiterates its position that acquisition of language from birth is a human right for every person, and that deaf infants and children should be given the opportunity to acquire and develop proficiency in American Sign Language (ASL) as early as possible."
To see the rest, go to nad.org.
Undoubtedly , language acquisition is essential for every human. However, it is doubtful that a child of hearing parents will become proficient in sign language (and therefore be able to think in complex ways) if the parents are not already fluent in sign language prior to their birth. Could I teach and expect my child to converse in Russian? And that is a spoken language. Most hearing people have no experience in visual language, besides the fact that it would take years to become proficient in any language. Meanwhile, the child's early developmental years would be ticking away... the sensitive period for learning a new language is birth to 12 years of age. Hearing parents of deaf infants have rarely learned ASL. They will not be fluent.
I chuckle when I read about an excited hearing parent whose child knows 20 (or 30 or 100) sign words at age 2. Do you know how many words a child typically should know at that age? And, what kind of sentences they should, developmentally, be able to formulate? It doesn't get easier, either-- the 6 year old learns 6-10 NEW words a day. Will the hearing parent be able to learn and teach that many sign language words? More than likely, they will be left behind. Eventually, the child whose primary language is ASL may not be able to communicate well with their own family.
My kids hear just fine with their cochlear implants, and so, they have learned and can speak fluently in the language of their family.