Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH) children need to master at least one language (spoken or signed) to reach their full potential. Providing access to a natural sign language supports this goal. Despite evidence that natural sign languages are beneficial to DHH children, many researchers and practitioners advise families to focus exclusively on spoken language. We critique the Pediatrics article ‘Early Sign Language Exposure and Cochlear Implants’ (Geers et al., 2017) as an example of research that makes unsupported claims against the inclusion of natural sign languages. We refute claims that (1) there are harmful effects of sign language and (2) that listening and spoken language are necessary for optimal development of deaf children. While practical challenges remain (and are discussed) for providing a sign language-rich environment, research evidence suggests that such challenges are worth tackling in light of natural sign languages providing a host of benefits for DHH children – especially in the prevention and reduction of language deprivation.
- Award ID(s):
- 1922066
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10404365
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Cultural Anthropology
- Volume:
- 37
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 0886-7356
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract We examined the impact of exposure to a signed language (ASL) at different ages on the neural systems that support spoken language phonemic discrimination in deaf individuals with cochlear implants (CIs). Deaf CI users (N = 18, age = 18–24 years) who were exposed to a signed language at different ages and hearing individuals (N = 18, age = 18–21 years) completed a phonemic discrimination task in a spoken native (English) and non-native (Hindi) language while undergoing functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) neuroimaging. Behaviorally, deaf CI users who received a CI early versus later in life showed better English phonemic discrimination, albeit phonemic discrimination was poor relative to hearing individuals. Importantly, the age of exposure to ASL was not related to phonemic discrimination. Neurally, early-life language exposure, irrespective of modality, was associated with greater neural activation of left-hemisphere language areas critically involved in phonological processing during the phonemic discrimination task in deaf CI users. In particular, early exposure to ASL was associated with increased activation in the left hemisphere’s classic language regions for native versus non-native language phonemic contrasts for deaf CI users who received a CI later in life. For deaf CI users who received a CI early in life, the age of exposure to ASL was not related to neural activation during phonemic discrimination. Together, the findings suggest that early signed language exposure does not negatively impact spoken language processing in deaf CI users but may instead potentially offset the negative effects of language deprivation that deaf children without any signed language exposure experience prior to implantation. This empirical evidence aligns with and lends support to recent perspectives regarding the impact of ASL exposure in the context of CI usage.
-
In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, European scholars began to search for a new kind of knowledge, what Francis Bacon (1561-1626) in 1620 would call a ‘New Philosophy; or Active Science’ (The Great Instauration, 1620), and what we have come to see as the beginnings of the modern natural sciences. These scholars sought to engage with the things of nature, in addition to the words of texts, and, as they looked about for models of this new kind of enquiry, they took up the case history used by their medical colleagues. They also looked to the methods of history, for history involved gathering observations and experiences about the human world, just as the new type of investigation these scholars sought would observe and collect experiences of the natural realm. They began to call what they did ‘natural history’. These scholars also looked to the handwork of craftspeople and their ability to manipulate natural materials in order to produce valuable products. Where these newly self-described ‘natural historians’ and ‘experimental philosophers’ could read the texts of their medical and historian colleagues, they generally had no such familiar entry point into handwork, for craftspeople produced things, and only rarely recorded their work in words and texts that the scholars could read. As Francis Bacon complained in the Novum Organum, ‘experience is illiterate’. Of course, craftspeople were not illiterate, but were fluent, rather, in a different kind of language and knowledge, one that posed problems for sixteenth-century scholars, and continues to make life difficult for the historians who study them. In the following essay, we suggest that one means for overcoming this problem is to bring historians and natural scientists back into conversation with each other, as they were in the sixteenth century when exploration of the human world provided a model for the just emerging study of the natural realm. Between 1400 and 1700, European craftspeople similarly found words to be inadequate: they paradoxically declared in writing that writing was inadequate to convey their skills, and that book learning was inferior to bodily experience.more » « less
-
In 2017, Paulo Blikstein, Dor Abrahamson, and the Interaction Design and Children Community established an annual award in the memory of Edith Ackermann to recognize the work of two scholars, one emergent and one eminent. These individuals would be acknowledged for their accomplishments but also tasked with a mission to complete for the following year's conference. Through a series of meetings they would produce an artifact that would be shared with IDC. In 2018, Michael Horn was recognized as the emergent scholar and Heidi Schelhowe was recognized as the eminent scholar. Through a series of conversations culminating in an in-person visit, Mike and Heidi have written this essay in which they share resonating themes from their conversations.more » « less
-
This essay centers on the voices of leading scholars in science and STEM education on how equity can and should be centered in reviewing proposals for granting organizations. As the decisions made as a result of the reviewing process significantly impact the future directions of the field, we recognize the urgency in considering how equity is considered in this process. Through their experiences, four researchers offer the science and STEM community a call to action. The scholars interviewed highlighted that equitable reviewing and funding research and professional development will require changes within the science education and STEM funding ecosystem. Three overarching themes include (1) changing the ideologies and culture of science and STEM education research funding will require centering the needs of the communities being served; (2) institutions and granting organizations should adopt equity-focused and holistic rubrics and models; and 3) we each have an individual responsibility to employ equity during the review process. Thus, this essay has the potential to both inspire and provide explicit examples of how we can all center equity as we strive to transform the future of science and STEM education.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.14506/ca37.1.10
