User talk:Hoyalzrs/sandbox

Your article looks great. I would like to make some suggestions. What would be a great addition to the article is adding a language plan such as how both languages can be learned at home, in school, and in the community? What kind of successful methods are often used in bilingual-bicultural approaches? Another idea, you could add to your article a list of resources for bilingual-bicultural education. Arbottoms (talk) 01:56, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Your article looks great so far! I really like your topic and the subsections you chose to provide. Here are a few things I noticed:

Under the section “Socio-emotional impact of Bilingual-Bicultural Education,” I would add more detail about the authors whose names you include (i.e. Vygotsky, Piaget), or I would avoid using their names altogether. When I first read them, the names confused me because I didn’t know who you were talking about. In this particular instance, stating the authors’ arguments/claims and citing their work might be sufficient. Otherwise, you should state their full names and give a brief description of who they are.

In your section, “Bilingual-Bicultural Movement,” I would add some more information about the movement toward Bi-Bi education in particular. Right now, it is heavily focused on Marie Jean Philip’s involvement in the Bi-Bi movement, rather than the movement itself. You should explain why/how/when some schools chose a Bi-Bi approach instead of, for example, an oralist approach. In addition, mentioning other pioneers in the movement as well as other schools who use a Bi-Bi approach would strengthen this section.

Under your “History” section, you have some really great content! I know this is a work in progress, so you’re still accumulating sources, but make sure to add citations to your information about Cummins’ Model and about the use of oralism and MCE systems in order to strengthen your assertions.

In order for your article to flow better, it might make more sense to order your sections in the following way: 1. History, 2. Bilingual-Bicultural Movement, 3. Social-emotional impact of Bilingual-Bicultural Education, and 4. International. This way, people will know about other methods, such as oralism, used to educate the deaf, before you introduce the movement to Bi-Bi education. Then, after the reader is familiar with the lineage, then the impacts of Bi-Bi education as well as its uses internationally will flow nicely thereafter. Cykresge (talk) 23:55, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review

Your article is off to a beautiful start. The layout is clear and wonderful, but I think you have room to add more in each of the sections. Of course, these articles are still a work in progress, but I would love to see you delve even deeper into the topics you are discussing. Especially with the international portion of the article. I would like to know where else is using BiBi and how they use it in the country. I also wanted to say that you use a great amount of sources and cite very well. Great job overall! Kabarton1 (talk) 22:11, 20 March 2017 (UTC)kabarton1

Peer Review

It looks like you have a good outline and I really liked how you incorporated the socio-emotional aspect with backings from Piaget and Vygotsky. The international section was also very interesting but it left me wanting more. Maybe you could add more information about what the impact was in those countries after those landmark changes were made to show supporting evidence of the pros of bilingualism for Deaf children. I also thought that some of the statements have the potential to be viewed as biased. Statements like, 'Deaf children use sign to express themselves...'may not be seen as neutral since all Deaf children do not use sign to express themselves. To help create a more unbiased view, maybe you could incorporate information still about the portion of the population that chooses not to sign but also add evidence (like from the articles we read last semester) that sign language should at least be used in combination with spoken language approaches, cochlear implants, etc. This looks like a really great start and a lot of great resources listed to pull from as well. I'm looking forward to seeing the finished product!Jessblank (talk) 02:50, 22 March 2017 (UTC)jessblank

Peer Review

I just wanted to add in that expanding the international section could also talk about the Netherlands. There are a lot of articles that have focused on how bi-bi has been implemented, as well as impact on educational gains. The latter is rarely mentioned in US sources, but provides a strong foundation for the idea that skilled sign language users have higher gains academically - which is a central tenent/purpose for bi-bi ed. Structure1019 (talk) 20:54, 3 April 2017 (UTC)