Jump to content

Bilingual–bicultural education

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Purplewowies (talk | contribs) at 16:33, 3 October 2023 (MOS:CLAIM). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"BiBi" redirects here. For the South Korean singer, see Bibi (singer).

Bilingual–Bicultural or Bi-Bi deaf education programs use sign language as the native, or first, language of Deaf children. In the United States, for example, Bi-Bi proponents state that American Sign Language (ASL) should be the natural first language for deaf children in the United States, although the majority of deaf and hard of hearing being born to hearing parents. In this same vein, the spoken or written language used by the majority of the population is viewed as a secondary language to be acquired either after or at the same time as the native language.

In Bi-Bi education, a signed language is the primary method of instruction. The bicultural aspect of Bi-Bi education emphasizes Deaf culture and strives to create confidence in deaf students by exposing them to the Deaf community.

Various studies have found a correlation between ASL skill level and English literacy or reading comprehension. The most plausible explanation for this is that ASL skill level predicts English literacy level.[1] Having a basis of American Sign Language can benefit the acquisition of the English language. In fact, bilingual children show more development in cognitive, linguistic, and meta-linguistic processes than their monolingual peers.[2]

36% to 40% of residential and day schools for deaf students in the US report using Bi-Bi education programs.[3]

Sweden and Denmark are two countries known for their bilingual–bicultural education of deaf children. Sweden passed a law in 1981 that mandated bilingualism as a goal of deaf education. Denmark recognized sign language as an equal language and espoused sign language as the primary method of instruction in schools for the deaf in 1991.[4]

Notable examples of schools utilizing the Bi-Bi method in the US include The Learning Center for the Deaf in Massachusetts and the Illinois School for the Deaf, which uses cued speech to maintain a language separation between ASL and English.

Bilingual-Bicultural Movement

Marie Jean Philip was a pioneer in the Bilingual-Bicultural (Bi-Bi) movement.[5] In 1985, The Learning Center for Deaf Children in Framingham, Massachusetts, was able to convince Philip to begin a new career as Special Assistant to the Director for Implementation of Bilingual/Bicultural Policies. After two years, Philip agreed to take on the full-time position of Bilingual Bicultural Coordinator, which she held from 1988. Philip led the school into the Bi-Bi education system.

The Learning Center for the Deaf became the first Deaf school in the United States to officially adopt a Bilingual-Bicultural teaching philosophy.[6] Schools in California,[7] Indiana,[8] and Maryland soon also officially adopted Bilingual-Bicultural teaching philosophies.

On September 24, 2018, Carey M. Ballard published a thirty-minute documentary film, Bilingual-Bicultural Movement at The Learning Center for the Deaf, which examines the history of the movement.[9]

History

Bilingual–bicultural education is based on Cummins' Model of Linguistic Interdependence. In 1976, James Cummins predicted that proficiency in a first language would correlate to competence in a second language because a single cognitive process underlies language acquisition for both languages. After decades of using the oral method of education, some advocates sought a new method for teaching deaf students. Many schools then began to use systems of Manually Coded English (MCE) in an attempt to develop English in deaf students. After the perceived failure of Manually Coded English systems, some educators began using the bilingual–bicultural model.[2]

Socio-emotional impact

Research has shown links between sociocultural factors and students' educational success. Learning in their first language allows students to feel a sense of belonging, leading to their academic success, including development in their two languages.[10] The bilingual teaching approach creates meaningful academic experiences for students when cultural factors are recognized.[11] The cultural aspect of the bicultural bilingual approach enhances deaf students' experiences success in school.[12] The school climate in a bicultural-bilingual setting gives students the opportunity to foster their academic, cognitive and socio-cultural skills in two languages.

Lev Vygotsky, a former Soviet psychologist renowned for his study on social cognitive development, argued that the quality and quantity of children's play is contingent upon the language shared among children.[13][14] Piaget, another psychologist renowned for his child development study, and Vygotsky agreed that language plays a significant role in cognitive and social development, because language competence significantly shapes play behaviors.[15] When deaf children are in a Bi-Bi setting where they have access to language and the full ability to communicate with their peers, they are developing and fine-tuning their cognitive and social skills.

A study on deaf children and theory of mind (ToM), which is essentially the ability to put oneself in someone else's shoes, showed no differences in performance in theory of mind tasks between deaf children of deaf parents and their hearing peers.[16][17] This means that deaf children with deaf parents were advantaged in having acquired language from birth. Deaf children with hearing parents, whether they were educated using spoken English or ASL, showed delays in two ToM tasks, false beliefs and knowledge states.[16] It is worth mentioning that not all deaf children born with hearing parents are linguistically disadvantaged because hearing parents can acquire sign language to communicate with their deaf children.

The primary cause of delays in theory of mind is the lack of access to conversations in the environmental, opportunities for incidental learning, and the difficulty in communicating about daily routines. Those create challenges in discussing thoughts, beliefs and intentions among deaf children lacking language.[18][19] When deaf children are exposed to natural and accessible language from an early age, they do not have delays in theory of mind reasoning and demonstrate a high capacity in understanding and reasoning about others' minds. Evidence have suggested that there is a correlation between having a strong theory of mind and a strong language foundation. It can be argued that the Bi-Bi approach provides deaf children with optimal access to language to support typical socio-emotional development.

Deaf children use sign to express themselves, discuss events, ask questions, and refer to things in their settings, just as hearing children use spoken language.[20] The human brain is naturally wired to crave information and constant access to communication, and social settings with accessible language provide that.[21] The earlier that Deaf children have the chance to naturally acquire sign language with constant language input, the better their cognitive and social skills, because they are able to receive information about actions, objects, experiences, and events in time.[22]

References

  1. ^ Goldin-Meadow, Susan; Mayberry, Rachel I. (November 2001). "How Do Profoundly Deaf Children Learn to Read?". Learning Disabilities Research and Practice. 16 (4): 222–229. doi:10.1111/0938-8982.00022.
  2. ^ a b Prinz, Philip M.; Strong, Michael (August 1998). "ASL Proficiency and English Literacy within a Bilingual Deaf Education Model of Instruction". Topics in Language Disorders. 18 (4): 47–60. doi:10.1097/00011363-199808000-00006.
  3. ^ LaSasso, C. (1 January 2003). "Survey of Residential and Day Schools for Deaf Students in the United States That Identify Themselves as Bilingual-Bicultural Programs". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 8 (1): 79–91. doi:10.1093/deafed/8.1.79. PMID 15448048.
  4. ^ Baker, Sharon; Baker, Keith (August 1997). Educating Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: Bilingual-Bicultural Education (Report). ERIC ED414671.
  5. ^ Philip, Marie Jean and Anita Small. 1992. Bilingual/Bicultural Program Development at The Learning Center for Deaf Children. In: Deaf Studies: What's Up? Conference Proceedings, October 24–25, 1991, pp. 51-107.
  6. ^ "Petersen Collection - Banner Template". library.rit.edu.
  7. ^ Norton, Kenneth W. 2000. The Eagle Soars to Enlightenment. Fremont, CA: California School for the Deaf
  8. ^ Bilingual-Bicultural program implementation timeline, Indiana School for the Deaf, unpublished, circa 2000.
  9. ^ Archived at Ghostarchive and the Wayback Machine: "Bilingual-Bicultural Movement at The Learning Center for the Deaf". YouTube.
  10. ^ Sánchez, B.; Colón, Y.; Esparza, P.J. (2005). "The Role of Sense of School Belonging and Gender in the Academic Adjustment of Latino Adolescents". Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 34 (6): 619–628. doi:10.1007/s10964-005-8950-4. S2CID 143864108.
  11. ^ Cummins, James (1979). "Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children". Review of Educational Research. 49 (2): 222–25l. doi:10.2307/1169960. JSTOR 1169960.
  12. ^ Seremeth, Mary Ann (2016). A study of teacher efficacy in secondary American Sign Language-English teaching (Thesis). OCLC 978349766. ProQuest 1870036812.
  13. ^ Vygotsky, L. S. (April 1967). "Play and Its Role in the Mental Development of the Child". Soviet Psychology. 5 (3): 6–18. doi:10.2753/RPO1061-040505036.
  14. ^ Vygotsky, L. S.; Cole, Michael (1978). Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-57629-2.[page needed]
  15. ^ Piaget, J.(1962). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. New York Norton.
  16. ^ a b Schick, Brenda; de Villiers, Peter; de Villiers, Jill; Hoffmeister, Robert (March 2007). "Language and Theory of Mind: A Study of Deaf Children". Child Development. 78 (2): 376–396. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.473.8685. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01004.x. PMID 17381779.
  17. ^ Goldman, Alvin I. (2012). "Theory of Mind". In Margolis, Eric; Samuels, Richard; Stich, Stephen P. (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Cognitive Science. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195309799.013.0017. ISBN 978-0-19-530979-9.
  18. ^ Peterson, Candida C.; Siegal, Michael (March 1995). "Deafness, Conversation and Theory of Mind". Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 36 (3): 459–474. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1995.tb01303.x. PMID 7782409.
  19. ^ Peterson, Candida C.; Siegal, Michael (March 2000). "Insights into Theory of Mind from Deafness and Autism". Mind and Language. 15 (1): 123–145. doi:10.1111/1468-0017.00126.
  20. ^ Volterra, V.; Caselli, M.C.C. (1985). "From gestures and vocalizations to signs and words". In Stokoe, William C.; Volterra, Virginia (eds.). SLR '83: Proceedings of the III International Symposium on Sign Language Research, Rome, June 22-26, 1983. Linstok Press. pp. 1–9. ISBN 978-0-932130-08-2.
  21. ^ Marschark, Marc (June 2001). Language Development in Children Who Are Deaf: A Research Synthesis (Report). ERIC ED455620.
  22. ^ Smith, Karen E.; Landry, Susan H.; Swank, Paul R. (January 2000). "Does the Content of Mothers' Verbal Stimulation Explain Differences in Children's Development of Verbal and Nonverbal Cognitive Skills?". Journal of School Psychology. 38 (1): 27–49. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(99)00035-7.

Further reading

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bilingual–bicultural_education&oldid=1178430578"