Let’s beware of “Wolves in Deaf-friendly clothing”!
Edward Miner Gallaudet was one of the strongest supporters of ASL-based education and opponent of A.G. Bell’s views. During the period that Oralism was becoming more widespread, EMG tried to suggest some ways that Manualism and Oralism could co-exist in Deaf education. I was shocked recently to find out that Donald Moores, a professor of Deaf education at Gallaudet (and current Editor of the American Annals of the Deaf), in his textbook, “Educating the Deaf”, wrote a revisionist history which I share here. (Editorial Note: In the video, I called it the “Simultaneous Method”, when I should have referred to it as the “Combined Method”. Geez! It sure gets confusing sometimes trying to remember all these different terminologies! Thanks to FM for pointing out my error).
Jean Boutcher said,
July 4, 2008 @ 10:56 pm
Dr. Moores was as bitter as Dr. Frisina was about Gallaudet College’s use of sign language in the classroom. I have a hearing friend who studied under him for an MS Degree in Education. She says that most professors in Graduate School are oral advocates and are closely associated with professors in the Audiology Department. One should remember that there are few deaf professors as well as few deaf graudates. The aforementioned friend learned a great deal through experience that deaf children learn English much better through ASL, not the other way around. So what you have recently learned about Dr. Moores calling EMG the father of oral education does not surprise me an iota.
Off on a tangent for a moment, someone has recently said somewhere that AGBell signed much better than EMG. I do not buy that because EMG was a CODA, signing fluently in ASL he picked up from his mother and adored her and invited her to live with him in his residence and appointed her as the First Matron of Gallaudet College. Furthermore, EMG mingled with Clerc and deaf students at ASD in West Hartford.
AGB’s mother became hard-of-hearing and knew no sign language. I believe that he was not a fluent signer when he learned ASL in the USA.
Back to square one, I do not take Dr. Moores’s version to the bank. I think that he wanted to psyche out ASL proponents.
Belated happy Fourth of July.
DrDonG said,
July 4, 2008 @ 11:09 pm
Jean,
I knew Moores is “old school” — SEE and SimCom supporter — but he never presented himself as a total oralist. More as “neutral” friend of Deaf children. But for him to take a couple of things by EMG and use that to totally distort the historical record, especially in a textbook that is used by thousands of future teachers of the Deaf (and the book presents itself as a “neutral” text too) — that is what flabbergasts me, and his mask of “neutrality” is what is truly dangerous that I am warning against here.
FH said,
July 5, 2008 @ 12:14 am
Two small corrections…. EMG’s name sign was with the letter E (not M). Also, he called it “The Combined Method” (not the “Simultaneous Method”).
Probably Moore was talking about the fact that Gallaudet traveled to Europe to study oral techniques, then he came back to America and advised that schools offer some oral training. He probably made that recommendation in order to prevent the oralists in Boston from gaining more influence. He can say: “Look, we already do oral training in the schools”–and that would take the wind out of the sails of the American oral movement that started in Boston.
MM said,
July 5, 2008 @ 2:36 am
The issue is the perception sign language us a DEAF form of communication, and not one which transfers to the mainstream very well. The most effective use of sign language is STILL, only in the deaf world. Outside it will require a translator or at least someone who’s sign aware.
The problem posed via education is how to help and enable deaf people to move outside the deaf area they are restricted to. Not all deaf people never want to go anywhere else, they have ambitions etc the same as everyone else. Martha’s vineyard showed this,the deaf community there was decimated by opportunity to move out.
I did a blog on total communication myself. This isn’t a let’s drop sign in favor or orals, but more a plea that sign alone is not enough in itself even though the most effective (Relatively !), to some deaf people. It comes with ‘strings’ attached. The fact does remain if e.g. deaf children are to maximize communication to get access int eh world outside then they are going to need a lot more than just sign language there.
Should there be opposition to that suggestion ? In the ‘deaf’ world they sign, outside they don’t, so surely some compromise apart from dependency on others to get by is the best way ? I don’t feel a non-comprehensive communication policy serves deaf at all. With respect the never-ending A G Bell versus ASL thing provides nothing but an impasse, an constant source for divisive stances… In reality it seems neither are going to give an inch. There is a need to move on.
JD said,
July 5, 2008 @ 3:45 am
Good post! I thought of Raychelle Harris when I saw the title of your post. She is a wolf in Deaf Friendly clothing. She hurts the Deaf communty more than she realizes by talking about cochlear implants as tools. She continues to participate in the ASL-CI community, but does seem not participate in any other blogs or vlogs. She does not support DBC which is crazy! How can a person not support ASL for babies? Raychelle does not support DBC just because some of core DBC members have personal opinions about cochlear implants.
I agree about Donald Moores. There are too many people like him at Gallaudet and other places. The Deaf community needs to stop participating in research by those people. We definitely should not participate in hearing people’s research. If we meet Deaf researchers, we should check their background and beliefs before we participate. Research/publications can hurt us. Any research that involves CI people, do not participate. They always try to compare us with CI people. They will say CI people are successful in this and that to make their research statistics look pretty and they can get a lot of money for more research.
We should name all wolves in Deaf friendly clothing so we can watch out for them!
DrDonG said,
July 5, 2008 @ 4:24 am
FH — I’ll have to check, but I always saw Miner’s sign name with an “M”. But yes, you’re right, it was the “Combined Method”, not “Simultaneous Method”. I got a little confused there.
Moores was apparently talking about EMG’s proposals that I outlined in the first part of the post, but he could have been also including his European visit. But EMG was always trying to prevent the Oralists from gaining a stronger foothold, as you describe — there is no question about that. In fact, EMG came back from Europe unimpressed with the Oralists’ claims and discussed how the Oralists “doctored” their evidenceto make themselves look so successful. He even said that some Oral teachers in Europe themselves were not so confident in their own Oral methodology.
JD — There are many “wolves” out there — we have to keep watching for them and protect our “flock”.
MM — I saw your post on TC, and am still chewing on it. I’ll have a response later. But for now, we don’t have any problem with maximizing Deaf students’ opportunities, educationally, socially, or communicatively. Using ASL (or BSL) as a language of instruction doesn’t mean ASL-only. It can be ASL and speech skills, IF the student has the ability to develop those skills. But many can’t, and we all know that. Does that mean they’re limited with sign? No. They can still use English — in WRITING, on paper, computer, pager, etc. for employment and any contact outside the Deaf world that they choose to have. It is important for us to provide the students with full skills in ASL/BSL/CSL/XSL AND at least the written form of the spoken language of their society. Speech is a nice plus, but I’m sure even you, as a later-deafened person, have experienced (as have I) that using speech in Hearing-centered settings poses its own set of problems.
RLM said,
July 5, 2008 @ 9:49 am
Don G,.
I want to make sure if we are talking about very same person, Dr. Donald Moores, an
interim provost to take over Dr. Jane Fernandes or someone real different from Dr. Moores,
Deaf Education Professor.
We have to remmy that there are two Gallaudet – Thomas Gallaudet and EMG. To make
sure that we do not confuse either of individual. I dunno know about EMG traveled across Europe
to search for new educational methods for teaching deaf children.
EMG had some kind of personal stain on his own legacy for re-structured the deaf education program
for would-be educators of the deaf to be only limited to hearing students and deprive deaf students. That was created the “Normal Department” as some kind of panderings to AGB’s frequent congressional
visits to pressure the U.S. Congress to validify the oral education of the deaf. Many people said that
was a brilliant move on EMG’s part to save the National Deaf-Mute College (Gallaudet College/Gallaudet
University) from closing forever.
Gallaudet College back in late 1960s and 1970s, entirely responsible for disfranchisizing
the generation of deaf youngsters after its introduction to the Signed English, LOVE and Pidgin
Sign English.
Jean Boutcher, I do respect your personal viewpoint to be truly skepticial about AGB being an
eloquent signer than EMG. That was from Gallaudet students’ journals and diaries writing about
how pleasant and delightful AGB was with them during his visit to Gallaudet.
Same thing, I respect Chris Kaftan and David Ennis’ viewpoints and skepticism. I would not blame them at all. Chris mentioned that he found differently about AGB and EMG’s signing skills from his
research at Gallaudet. I totally trust David Ennis and Chris Kaftan including you, Jean Boutcher
very much.
RLM
anna s said,
July 5, 2008 @ 9:50 am
Don,
It pains me to see our fellow Deaf naming our own in a negative light and you not condemning it. Raychelle is a big advocate for ASL for all deaf children, CI or not. Allowing a commenter to bash our very own is akin to irresponsible professionalism on your side.
The idea of keeping an eye for wolves in sheep clothing in the field of Deaf education is something I totally agree with you, but to stoop that LOW to not to mention personal bashing on your v/blogsite is unfathomable for someone of your caliber.
A
DrDonG said,
July 5, 2008 @ 10:23 am
Anna,
I agree with you mostly, because I don’t want to see us starting a name-calling war against each other. However, JD did have some positive aspects to her comments (adding about Moores and reasearch) and she explained her point of why she named a certain person. I don’t want to start a “wolf scare”, but at the same time I do recognize that there are those within the Deaf community who are not acting in our community’s best interests as well.
I do thank you for your feedback. I will tell you that because of your feedback, I deleted several comments with your “batch” where people pointed fingers at someone else without justification on why they wanted to name that person or responded to commenters “well, you did this and that, so you’re a wolf too” or just offered non-productive commentary. I will continue to delete any other similar comments that do not productively add to the discussion.
MM said,
July 5, 2008 @ 10:29 am
Indeed speech is as much as a barrier as deafness is, if you are deaf too, because they acquaint hearing with speech, and that includes signing deaf too ! except with them its a double whammy in that people who speak, ORALISE, and are oralists, they aren’t ! It doesn’t bother ANYONE what is taught via TC, let’s forget the sign oral thing altogether, what works is what is OK.
However to get the most out of your ability, you need intensive training and education in as many aspects as you can get, both before and AFTER school finishes, since it is a constant learning process. The UK has no system in place to teach TC properly there are patches here and there. Hearing people in the UK the same as in America HAVE to update and learn new skills just to stand still, I don’t know about America but here when school finishes, so does the apparent need by deaf people to enhance what they have learnt, it seems to grind to a halt after. They’ve settled for this mode or that mode regardless of effectiveness.
Acquired deaf are in an ideal position to reflect on these aspects having done the same thing but in reverse, and often as adults too, we have the benefit of hindsight. It is a great pity the hard-core do not listen to what we have to say, since we are more ‘front line’ than they are and at the cutting face of issues. Unlike linguistic type deaf people and hearing we are akin to neither, so cannot utilize the systems there as effectively, if WE don’t treat everything via communication on the basis of effectiveness we are out, we don’t have the luxury of culture, linguistics, hearing aids, or even CI’s, our access to sign and lip-reading classes is also severely restricted here.
In short BSL is for HEARING people via classes, and lip-reading is ONLY for those with enough residual hearing to get the most out of it, we have nowhere to go, and nowhere to build skills up, so the view tends then to be culture so what ? at times, what does it do for me ? Likewise with hearing support services, what use are they if only a pencil and paper is the mode they can use for us ? As people get older they head towards acquiring severe loss, so you will get thousands of people like this resentful of the whole shebang and tired with the politics of it all.
Everyone pleads whatever works is OK but the reality….. is they don’t practice this, if you sign they don’t or I lip-read and you are not able to lip-speak well etc…. if proper TC was taught to us all, then we would appreciate what needs to be done to bridge these gaps, and not take the apathetic stance of ‘horses for courses’ and opt OUT.
AL said,
July 5, 2008 @ 10:30 am
Don, your response to Anna was good, but you did not say whether you agreed with JD that Raychelle is a wolf or not. So far it seems as if you agree with JD and her constant attacks on Raychelle regarding her stance on CIs and ASL. If so, that is unfortunate and your support of JD would only create more divisions within our community and encourage anti-CI attitudes instead of supporting individual choices as long as ASL is always in the picture.
raychelle said,
July 5, 2008 @ 10:54 am
Anna, thanks for your comment, you’re absolutely right – I sometimes feel like a broken record, ha. ASL for all deaf children, with or without implants.
All – I agree about the importance of participating in research about Deaf people that is done for, by, and with Deaf people – Dr. Candace McCullough did a fabulous vlog about this a while back on her ascdeaf.com blog. http://www.ascdeaf.com/blog/?p=323
I along with two colleagues have been working on research ethics specifically for Sign Language communities – which came mainly from our frustration seeing many poorly designed research projects or research resulting in incorrect interpretations when it comes to the Deaf-World. Our work was recently quoted by Dr. Patrick Boudreault at the recent Deaf Studies conference in Utah. The article will come out anytime now in the Sign Language Studies journal.
Here is a brief abstract:
Codes of ethics exist for most professional associations with members who do research on, for, or with the Sign Language communities. However, these ethical codes are silent regarding the need to frame research ethics from a cultural standpoint, an issue of particular salience for the Sign Language communities. Scholars writing from the perspective of feminists, indigenous peoples, and human rights advocates have commonly expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of representation of their voices in the conversation about research ethics. Members of Sign Language communities and their advocates can learn from others who share in this struggle, as well as contribute much to this topic. We propose the development of Sign Language Communities Terms of Reference (SLCTR) as a means to research by, for, and with the Sign Language communities.
http://slcresearchethics.blogspot.com
Jean Boutcher said,
July 5, 2008 @ 11:14 am
RLM,
Two different Moores:
One is Dr. Donald Moores who joined the Graduate School faculty at Gallaudet in the early 1950s and was still there when I entered in 1973. I do not know what has become of him after the early Eighties.
The other is Dr. Michael Moore (sans “s”), who joined the NWC Preparatory School in 1983 for several years before becoming a
professor of biology at the main campus. He was the one who was
elected as Intermit Proviost.
DT said,
July 5, 2008 @ 2:16 pm
How is it that Moores can get away with his blatant and defaming paintbrush as it concerns EMG without consequence?
Brian Riley said,
July 5, 2008 @ 3:00 pm
Do a Google search on “gallaudet university annual reports”
and then click on the Wikipedia article, then down load the
Tenth Annual report and in that report there is a long report
written by EMG about his trip to Europe.
DrDonG said,
July 5, 2008 @ 3:08 pm
DT,
Moores can get away with it because it’s his book and books aren’t usually peer-reviewed like Journals are. Also, he stated it in a way that he can say it’s a “logical conclusion” (even if it isn’t). So even if the book was peer-reviewed, reviewers might not have caught it or said, “well, that’s his conclusion from the evidence” (and at the time of the writing, there weren’t many Deaf involved in the reviewing process (still aren’t enough, I think…).
DT said,
July 5, 2008 @ 3:14 pm
Thank you DonG; I understand now. But I don’t think, just like you, that it’s right to remain mum about it.
And B. Riley; I don’t do Wiki; that’s more your domain from what I’ve seen recently and thanks a lot (not) for your entry on the eve of the DBC to get things humming right off the bat. *End of sarcasm rant*
DrDonG said,
July 5, 2008 @ 4:03 pm
DT,
What are you talking about re: Brian’s entry in Wikipedia? Like you, I don’t do Wiki — I have a deep mistrust for a”source of information” that is supplied by any random person off the street (but I’m a college Professor, so I want to see my students using verifiable, reliable information…)
Jean Boutcher said,
July 5, 2008 @ 10:30 pm
DrDonG,
it is good to know that you are one of professors who have a good head on his shoulders about Wikiencyopedia. The New York Times ran an article about students’s getting an F for their term papers from professors from Ivy Legue universities last May. The students were shocked that Wiki is an amateur encyclopedia edited BY anyone. I was shocked that they were not aware. I remember that a prankster wrote an article in Wiki about I. King Jordan. The word “Edit” appeared below, asking people to add or change. I said “Oh, my God!” Guess what, the article of Jordan had disappeared and a new article appeared — apparently furnished by the secretary of the president or by the Office of Public Relations.
MM said,
July 6, 2008 @ 11:04 am
Tell you what Don I completely agree re wikipedia, in academic circles in the UK you can’t quote wiki as a viable or validated source, only where wiki LINKS to one, any idiot can write a definition in Wiki as they see it, 2 years ago I put it to the test, and gave a very lengthy and almost believable (!) essay on a new term ‘UNdeaf’, it had partial believability because Shakespeare used the term, I used it to suggest anyone that didn’t belong to culture was this sector ! it was swallowed wholesale for a while, until I pulled it myself.
The history of Wiki is plagued with generalizations, not least 100s of deaf ones ! They tried monitoring it to get verification they couldn’t, references should ONLY be supplied by professional academics with verifiable qualifications. There again if they insist on that , why Wiki anyway, there are any amount of proper dictionaries and sources to read online. The danger of Wiki is things become colloquial by default and a lie told enough times becomes a truth doesn’t it. Wiki got hacked into by terrorists too, to present idealogical arguments to suit their auses no matter how abhorrent they were.
The deaf did the same in effect, utilized Wiki to project culture with the D and d thing, because usual dictionaries wouldn’t accept it except as a colloquialism, and not as a ‘Fact’
anna s said,
July 6, 2008 @ 10:23 pm
Is it possible that it is just an error on Moore’s side by getting the two mkixed up maybe even just a publishing error? I have that book in one of the boxes in the garage. (:
Nice background entertainment (speaking of your dog or did I see two?).
DrDonG said,
July 6, 2008 @ 11:40 pm
It COULD be an error, but I SERIOUSLY doubt it.
I only have one dog, but sometimes she acts like two. ;0
Patrick F. Mc Carthy said,
July 14, 2008 @ 7:14 pm
now come to think of it and if we are to learn from history well, EMG made what was thought to be as a most pragmatic move by supporting Combined Method (the quasi BI-BI), AGB and his propents made strong inroads in Deaf schools throughout States that resulted in laying off Deaf teachers from teaching Deaf children in schools, along with other ramifications. Will the history repeat ? just come to think of it…
Pax
DrDonG said,
July 14, 2008 @ 7:33 pm
Patrick,
I’m not sure I understand what you are suggesting. You mean that now that we are supporting Bi-Bi, oralism will come roaring back? Can you clarify?
johan said,
December 26, 2008 @ 8:36 pm
Hey!
Hello my name is Johan Gustafsson here.
very good fine ok.
LA of deaf glad house.
of american in the usa to your Johan Gustafsson fine ok
hugs barb!
feel los angeles good fine ok
Johan.G.