Friday, 19 June 2020

A BSL Education?

including deaf children
It is rather amazing there are still people who believe this comment accurate...

"Did you know deaf children leave school with a reading age 8/9 years old when they are 16 years old. Education is not fully accessible for all deaf children. We have a right to learn equally BSL is a british recognised language."

"That statistic is not true and hasn't been since mainstreaming replaced most UK deaf schools, it was the old deaf schools that limited the deaf child's education, mostly because it was assumed they couldn't speak or learn.  Deaf schools are the left-overs of institutional deaf support. Is BSL a recognised language? Not explained properly, the EU recognised it, along with 53 other regional 'languages', but it was left to the UK to ratify it and they never have in Education, nearest they got was TC (Total Education)."

"That was a BDA falsehood, they suggested BSL was accepted, but it was 'recognised' and that is not the same thing, as it carried little legal clout. If it did they wouldn't still be campaigning to get it into education."

"Demands for a BSL curriculum have been left 'on the table' year after year, there is very little political will to go with it. It would challenge parental choice."  

"An immersive BSL education has never been tried as I am aware, so he or she are asking parents to risk it in the hope it works for their child?  Big ask.   Deaf children are scattered all over the UK in small numbers, the only way it could work would be deaf children put in boarding schools in a field again. support for that would be next to nil."

"There are no teaching systems to enable that. Since most deaf schools closed (Less that 20 exist), the teaching support set up and specialisation mostly collapsed and it only was viable before because deaf children were segregated.  Both deaf education and the deaf 'world' relied on segregation to survive, we have to change the mindset."

"You won't find many hearing parents willing to go back to all that again, their kids come back strangers.  The only reason many were sympathetic to deaf demands was that lack of access in the mainstream but parents still don't want their children taught in isolation and annexe's."

"Yes, that is the real opposition to the  deaf demanding a signed education, they refuse to accept parental rights and challenge them.  Deaf children need the means and ability to access the mainstream where they will live, work and play, and little of it is based on sign language i.e. unless a deaf charity is recruiting or deaf arts get a disability subsidy, the deaf have to prove they can manage on their own without help."

The issue is not signed education enablement at all, but support in the mainstream, there are problems there, which enable deaf activists to demand an end to mainstreaming and go back to some glorious BSL educational future that actually has never existed, and the old system was shut down as inhibiting the deaf. Immersive education has never been tried. It means near every child would be unable to access further education properly and be hugely dependent on hearing interpreters, that isn't inclusion or empowerment.  A lot of the current issue is the support these deaf need is unavailable not being withheld.  They haven't 30% of the BSL terps they demand yet." 

"True deaf activism is illogical it is not even idealistic. They will probably insist on a UK Galludet or similar, which has failed in the USA with a few exceptions, and led to discrimination by decibel and the inherent racism in part as well as Hard of Hearing getting blocked from classes, ousting their own deaf head and vandalising statues and such.  It's losing money hand over fist too with their shenanigans." 

"That suggests putting all empowerment in one deaf basket is a bad move, it goes to extremes and becomes insular very quickly and becomes a ripe recruiting ground for the negatives.  They are never going to learn about acceptance or inclusion that way, just 50 shades of D.."

"Yup, 'Deaf Lives Matter!' and an inherent reluctance to accept others not signing the same as them makes it all look a bit dodgy, the UK would not go for it.  For UK BSL activism (All 6 of them BDA permitting!), to want to repeat the same mistakes is not going to happen,  While there will always be a minority within the deaf world so disabled and with learning issues etc who need a school that specialises, the majority can function OK in the mainstream, despite activists insisting they can't. Sign isolates and it is time that was realised."

"The reality is ANY school or educational system entirely sign based needs teachers, a curriculum, exams, basic technological hardware and software and everything academic in a BSL visual format, none of it exists.  Politically the basis would need to promote real inclusion and that won't happen in a segregated school or classroom somewhere.  Being an occasional visitor isn't inclusion."

"It would need massive training before it could happen, that takes years itself, there would have to be a direct link and requirement in any curriculum to enable as far as is possible the deaf child is literate and able to follow English, it is all very well insisting BSL has its own grammatical way of doing things, but the mainstream has too and it would be criminal to deprive any deaf child of the opportunity to advance themselves via an unrealistic demand to defy the country's norm and then expect deaf children will still benefit."


Deaf Read, undone by D and d?


It seems that is the case as recent changes to deaf.read (Pick your own capitals it makes no difference), is only found in the UK once via searches an average for every 20 attempts,it's not unusual for days being unable to log in.  We don't know what changes deaf read have made but the number of posts and reads tells its own story.

The 'Old' site is found easily but no longer updates anything, the new site cannot be found most of the time by any search option, and has single figure views by a very small number of people able to find it.  Amidst the confusion of Deaf.Read and deaf.read issues, it has been phished twice and listed in the UK as an unmoderated and suspect site too with security software suggesting re-direct options have been hacked and re-directs to trojan hosting sites.  Deaf read left front and back doors open apparently.  


Requests for a link that is viable produced no accuracy at all. The old deaf.read link is no longer viable, initially, we in the UK got a link that only sent us to ASL vlog site which has little following here and had an attack of 'rainbows' or something.  Clearly unless deaf.read changes its site title and removes the old site entirely then deaf are not able to find, or make a contribution to it. Can the site owners explain how we can effectively log in?  

As an aside dropping the D/d thing would make a great deal of sense.  Search options being what they are they don't really discriminate or identify us via the D or d thing at all it is either or both or Hard of Hearing or disabled.  I rely on deaf.read for my blog as the UK has no equivalent and still works a la old email vacuum site modus.   If this continues I may just have to take it down.  Basically, we are losing information too which is a shame.