Tuesday, 5 February 2019

Deaf Children

deaf children from lauren schlander on Vimeo.

No sign, no captions, no subtitles and no narrative.


Two new mobile apps being rolled out today, Live Transcribe and Sound Amplifier, are aimed at the 466 million people—more than 5 per cent of the world’s population—who are deaf or hard of hearing. The Live Transcribe app uses Google’s cloud-based, speech-to-text intelligence to offer text representations of spoken conversations as they’re happening, while Sound Amplifier relies on an Android-based dynamic audio processing effect to make speech and other sounds easier to hear.

During a demonstration with the press last month, a group of Google product managers showed how their presentations could be transcribed into text in near real-time by Live Transcribe. In another corner of the room, Google had engineered a hearing loss simulator as part of the demo of Sound Amplifier. Slip on a set of headphones, and a Google employee cranked the simulator to reduce your hearing abilities. By using the new app, testers could swipe on a series of sliders to adjust volume, ambient noise, voice clarity, and the distribution of sound to the left and right ears.

It’s easy to imagine a not-so-distant future when accessibility apps like these are increasingly aware of a person’s needs and become self-adjusting. Google research scientist Dimitri Kanevsky, who has been deaf since age one, had a conversation with a colleague about an upcoming party while using Live Transcribe on his personal phone.

SEE HEAR Backlash at ATR

Image result for sign language or not?The ailing BBC/UK Deaf program feedback slot angry at ATR's suggestion BSL use is unhelpful for some deaf children.  But then the SH feedback slot was erased on the BBC site because SEE HEAR couldn't cope with the criticism it got from the HoH and deafened who felt excluded, and the BBC then dumped feedback on social media, (They dumped the disabled too!).

They are now annoyed the criticism has followed them there.  They can run, they can't hide.  Sadly innocents like the parents get the flak.  The program hasn't reflected diversity in the deaf world in years. Is 'egg-bound' in cultural nonsense.  It's a cushy number for a select few deaf luvvies and still exists via public handouts.  It's clear too, the SH program utilised these parents for cultural gain too.

An important thing to realise is that the couple live in Wales, which, has NO DEAF SCHOOL for the child to attend.  They could face having to send their child to England to sign at a deaf school. 2 or 3 every year end up travelling to Bristol.  Mainstreamed welsh deaf/HoH education is not predominantly sign based either.  I'm sure the parents have considered this, but SH made no mention of it.

Initially on the ATR blog: Why hasn't the BDA or AOHL stepped in to provide free BSL? or is it charities want cash upfront too? I was confused by the demand for BSL given the child appears to have not even started education yet, is there some assumption that child will only sign? or has no other capability? It's not as clear cut as SEE HEAR makes out, and SEE HEAR is minority deaf viewing with an axe to grind as well being paid for nothing much at all.

@ATR: I'm sorry but Do you not talk to children before they go to school?? Is a deaf child not supposed to have any communication before they go to school? I'm assuming you've never learnt a second language? Or are you one of the lucky ones that you don't need to learn because it comes to you overnight? Of course, you don't need to learn BSL, because the parents will just know how to sign, just when they need to talk to their child , which according to you is when they go to school omg! My child is deaf, he cannot vocalise, so we sign with him, and incidentally, we wanted to communicate from birth, strange concept I know.

ATR:  I asked because I could not see how a child would understand BSL at that age.  I would assume it was more simplistic and basic manuals. Also Signed English is far more useful than BSL is, BSL is in decline, deaf schools, clubs, and social areas that use it are too because that is how UK education is (And everything else really), SE or SSE is still signing but more aligned to what we all use. Also, lip-reading/speaking etc is more widely used. Personally, I would use speech as well, it is an issue if you sign and don't speak to a child, they will assume speaking is not their norm, first impressions etc. 

I noticed a hearing aid, which suggests there is some residual hearing there, another reason. I do think it important the child comes first so the widest possible varied input would be any norm, never restrict it to just one mode, it limits child options. Many deaf children taught varied approaches that way gain a considerable advantage over those for whom the sign is all they have. Don 't listen to those deaf for whom nothing can or has ever changed, because each child is different in need, and, the child is yours, not theirs. Obviously its a personal view it is not meant to upset parents, for whom 'Deaf' advice is random, biased and unhelpful in the main part. They are fighting a losing battle, we don't want deaf children being collateral damage.