Instead of writing an essay, you are required to answer 5 questions in the blog below. There cannot be more than 10 replies to each question – so all questions get covered. First 10 comments only will be looked at. Make sure your name is attached to each post. A response has “facts” and at least three STRONG supporting statements. A response should be at least 6 sentences. Read the previous posts before you make a comment.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Interpreting in speech class
Why was Amy so frustrated with Melvina interpreting in the classroom?
Amy was so frustrated with Melvina interpreting in the classroom because Amy believed it would hinder the children’s ability to learn to speak. Amy thought that the presence of sign language in her classroom would undermine her effort to teach the children to speak since they would still be focused on the signing. Without the presence of ASL, the children would be more forced to learn to communicate through speech since that would be their only option. Melvina did not originally believe that the Deaf children would be able to learn how to speak which is likely why she kept interpreting even after Amy didn’t want her to. Ultimately, Melvina was doing what she thought was best for the children even though Amy disagreed. Both Melvina and Amy thought their methods were what was best for the children.
I agree that Amy wanted Melvina to stop interpreting the class because it would hinder the students' ability to learn to speak, but I also want to elaborate on another part of it. I think another reason Amy wanted Melvina to stop signing was to have the children respect her more as a teacher. By having Melvina to lean on for interpretations, the children wouldn't really have a need to focus on Amy or her teachings. I agree with Amy's decision with removing Melvina as it helps the children truly understand how to speak without outside help. -Emma
I agree with both of you. Another thing I noticed was that Amy did not want Melvina interpreting because Melvina was against her work and brought lots of negative energy into the classroom. Regardless of if she worked with Amy (despite her feelings), Amy knew the children would feel this bad energy and didn't want it. When the children sense Melvina disliking Amy, the won't work with her as well and may not learn as well. To me, Amy was less against the use of sign language as she was against Melvina's attitude. If she had been more positive and supportive, I feel Amy would not have kicked her out.
I agree with Jake about the negative energy, also I feel that the students were not embracing the new style of learning by having an easy way out through the interpreter. Amy knew it would take a lot of dedication and hard work, which is why she would need to earn their respect and attention in the classroom. Also the fact the children’s eyes can’t be watching two different people at the same time took away from the core part of Amy’s lessons. Amy wanted this to be her challenge to prove to herself that she is capable of accomplishing a daunting task. Melvina did contribute a negative vibe that the students could have absorbed and became less interested in investing their time and energy into something that wasn’t first nature to them. Amy also asserted herself in the situation to earn respect for her. -Noellie
Not only does she want respect, stated by Emma, it’s for the benefit of the children. Having to teach children speech when an interpreter is there, it would be difficult for the children to really understand fully, because they would be dependent on sign language to understand Amy, which she is trying to do with speech. This is for the best to have the children pay full attention to Amy gain the most from it. With the program already under close watch, she has no time to waste. Not only does she deserve to fully give her all into teaching these children, she shouldn’t have to share her experience teaching speech to Deaf children, when Melvina doesn’t believe in her or the idea of it. -Jada Farley
Amy was frustrated with Melvina interpreting because she believed that the children would never learn how to speak if the children would only be looking at Melvina. Amy wanted the children to look at her mouth and recognise the mouth and air movement. Amy realized that the children would learn to understand her if they are fully focused on her words. I agree with Mikayla that Amy felt it would undermine her efforts to help the children learn to speak. I believe that if Melvina would have stayed in the classroom, the children would never been able to use their voice as well as they are. Amy knew that the children focusing on the sign they wouldn’t learn as well. -Diana
Amy was so frustrated with Melvina interpreting in the classroom because Amy believed it would hinder the children’s ability to learn to speak. Amy thought that the presence of sign language in her classroom would undermine her effort to teach the children to speak since they would still be focused on the signing. Without the presence of ASL, the children would be more forced to learn to communicate through speech since that would be their only option. Melvina did not originally believe that the Deaf children would be able to learn how to speak which is likely why she kept interpreting even after Amy didn’t want her to. Ultimately, Melvina was doing what she thought was best for the children even though Amy disagreed. Both Melvina and Amy thought their methods were what was best for the children.
ReplyDeleteMikayla Henne
I agree that Amy wanted Melvina to stop interpreting the class because it would hinder the students' ability to learn to speak, but I also want to elaborate on another part of it. I think another reason Amy wanted Melvina to stop signing was to have the children respect her more as a teacher. By having Melvina to lean on for interpretations, the children wouldn't really have a need to focus on Amy or her teachings. I agree with Amy's decision with removing Melvina as it helps the children truly understand how to speak without outside help.
Delete-Emma
I agree with both of you. Another thing I noticed was that Amy did not want Melvina interpreting because Melvina was against her work and brought lots of negative energy into the classroom. Regardless of if she worked with Amy (despite her feelings), Amy knew the children would feel this bad energy and didn't want it. When the children sense Melvina disliking Amy, the won't work with her as well and may not learn as well. To me, Amy was less against the use of sign language as she was against Melvina's attitude. If she had been more positive and supportive, I feel Amy would not have kicked her out.
DeleteI forgot to put my name
Delete-Jake
I agree with Jake about the negative energy, also I feel that the students were not embracing the new style of learning by having an easy way out through the interpreter. Amy knew it would take a lot of dedication and hard work, which is why she would need to earn their respect and attention in the classroom. Also the fact the children’s eyes can’t be watching two different people at the same time took away from the core part of Amy’s lessons. Amy wanted this to be her challenge to prove to herself that she is capable of accomplishing a daunting task. Melvina did contribute a negative vibe that the students could have absorbed and became less interested in investing their time and energy into something that wasn’t first nature to them. Amy also asserted herself in the situation to earn respect for her.
ReplyDelete-Noellie
Not only does she want respect, stated by Emma, it’s for the benefit of the children. Having to teach children speech when an interpreter is there, it would be difficult for the children to really understand fully, because they would be dependent on sign language to understand Amy, which she is trying to do with speech. This is for the best to have the children pay full attention to Amy gain the most from it. With the program already under close watch, she has no time to waste. Not only does she deserve to fully give her all into teaching these children, she shouldn’t have to share her experience teaching speech to Deaf children, when Melvina doesn’t believe in her or the idea of it. -Jada Farley
ReplyDeleteAmy was frustrated with Melvina interpreting because she believed that the children would never learn how to speak if the children would only be looking at Melvina. Amy wanted the children to look at her mouth and recognise the mouth and air movement. Amy realized that the children would learn to understand her if they are fully focused on her words. I agree with Mikayla that Amy felt it would undermine her efforts to help the children learn to speak. I believe that if Melvina would have stayed in the classroom, the children would never been able to use their voice as well as they are. Amy knew that the children focusing on the sign they wouldn’t learn as well.
ReplyDelete-Diana