Chapters 19-21

Chapter 19:

Total communication is defined by the CEASD as "a philosophy incorporating the appropriate aural, manual, and oral modes of communication in order to ensure effective communication with and among hearing-impaired persons." It is described as a right for deaf individuals to have access to a large variety of communication that is suitable for the specific person. Many people who use this term tend to confuse it with the combining of speech and sign language. This was an interesting topic because the chapter provided a history of how Total Communication was used as a combining mode in the earliest deaf education classes. But as time went on oralism became more popular and signing was banned from the classroom. Thankfully Edward Miner Gallaudet rescued ASL from being discriminated against forever. He worked to advocate the "combined approach" allowing ASL to be used in the classroom and oral courses still being offered. This reintroduced Total Communication as a philosophy that "deaf children had the right of access to any form of communication that they felt comfortable with and would benefit from." 

I also learned about Simultaneous Communication in this chapter. This is a method of talking while signing. The book shares that Simultaneous Communication can often be confused wit Total Communication and I feel as if that is a fair statement. Although one is a philosophy and one a method, both involve oralism. "Bilingual-Bicultural" approach is also another topic this chapter covered. This approach uses "ASL-in-the-classroom to teach English." The authors clearly state that the "Bilingual-Bicultural" approach and the TC philosophy should not be confused with one another. The TC philosophy calls for diversity in the training needs of each individual deaf person, while the "Bi-Bi" approach strongly emphasizes the use of ASL in the classroom. 

Overall. this chapter was rich with information. I had no previous knowledge of the topics covered in Chapter 19, and feel as if it was a reasonably understandable introduction to three distinct concepts unique to the Deaf Community. I hope as I continue on my ASL "journey" I will personally experience these approaches first hand in different settings to better understand them and develop my own viewpoints. 

Chapter 20:

First and foremost let me just say how thankful I am that I attend a University that recognizes ASL as a foreign language. By enrolling in this course my eyes have truly been opened up to such an amazing group of people and I have learned so much in this short amount of time. I consider "CD 101" to be a wonderful blessing. 

With that being said, yes I believe that all universities should offer and accept ASL as a foreign language requirement. I might be a little biased in saying this. I agree 110% with the argument presented in the chapter for support in ASL foreign language programs. America is a "melting pot," right? If colleges and universities are willing to offer languages such as Spanish, French, German, and even Navajo, shouldn't they recognize the language of such an enormous group here in our own country?! I have often been asked by my peers what foreign language I am taking. When I respond with "ASL" I get some puzzled looks..."You mean that's a foreign language?" Gosh, that aggravates me. People all around the world use Sign Language, so step up American universities and recognize the need for not only "foreign" communication but domestic as well. 

I believe that ASL could have a written language, but does that mean it should? I don't feel as if ASL should HAVE to have a written language in order to get the respect/recognition it deserves. American Sign Language has endured many obstacles throughout history, but I don't think it should change in order to fit the "language requirements" set by hearing people. ASL works for deaf individuals, if there was a serious need for a written language in order for the deaf to improve or communicate I think it would have already been accepted and put to use. Similar to the written Navajo language, some native speakers understand it and some don't. That would be the same result for American Sign Language as a written language. That is even true with English speaking individuals; not all English speaking individuals understand English literature. The book states that "it is important to recognize that for a bilingual community the literature can be in two languages." I think ASL can be the physical language and English the written for the deaf. But, ultimately, I believe it is in the hands of the deaf individual or deaf community to decide.

Chapter 21:

I hate to say that this chapter kind of discouraged me. I guess I wanted to hear that deaf people are always eager for a  hearing signer to try to communicate with them (even if they are just beginners). But, as I reflect on it, I completely understand their point of view. I am from a small town so growing up I was never in a situation where I was "up close and personal" to a deaf/deaf conversation. Now that I have moved to college I see it more often. Like Alis Coates, I feel somewhat intimidated or nervous seeing deaf people interact. I have such a strong desire to approach deaf people signing in public, but I wouldn't say I am 100% confident in my abilities yet. I also fear that I would be considered annoying, even though I would want constructive criticism, I don't think I could handle being completely rejected. 

The Deaf Culture events are settings in which the deaf are eager to participate. At the most recent event one deaf guy (Sam) even acted as the teacher. He wasn't offended at all by our ASL abilities or lack-there-of. I feel comfortable communicating through ASL in those settings, but encountering a random conversation in a public place is a scary thought. I guess I can only hope for the best! :)