Sign Language Proficiency and MSD
Grady, thanks for providing more information. I do agree MDE should have included the job description about possessing fluency in ASL. Also they SHOULD provide reasonably adequate fund for evaluation and ongoing training in ASL for teachers and staff workers to prevent this situation from happening.
I am now doing ASL assessment for teachers and staff workers at Colorado School for the Deaf on contract. What I do is an informal in depth assessment of their signing skills and make recommendations how they can improve their signing skills. Later on these workers after having a grace time to polish their ASL skills will take a formal ASL Proficiency Interview and be rated by a group of professional raters working at full-time at a place outside the community. I cannot name the group right now because it has yet to offer a national wide service but hopefully in the near future it will happen. Results will be considered for continuing employment on contract, granting permanent position, promotion, merits, and tenure.
As a former rater at full time for 5 years and currently working on my doctoral in language development, acquisition, and assessment, I have seen many good teachers and workers in Deaf Ed programs, those with good visual aptitudes and motivation do learn and use ASL well. In hunch these people well respected by deaf students and workers, I can say many of them are approaching to 3.0 of proficiency scale, out of the highest, 5.0, for native – native like quality in signing. Weaker signers start at around 2.5 and go below. The ideal level is 3.5 as best as possible for middle to H.S. teaching and work positions. The higher is always best, no question about it.
This is a general description of each language proficiency level used in language proficiency testing for years. It is to give you an idea of what I am trying to describe ASL second language signers and their proficiency level.Â
Level 5Â Â Signing proficiency is equivalent to that of sophisticated native signer
or appears native-like.
Level 4Â Â Able to use the language fluently and accurately on all levels
pertinent to professional needs and broadly in social settings although do not demonstrate native quality.
Level 3Â Â Able to sign ASL sufficient structural accuracy and vocabulary to participate
well in most formal and informal conversations on practical, social, and professional needs.
Level 2Â Â Able to satisfy general social demands and limited work requirements
Level 1 Â Able to satisfy routine needs and minimum courtesy requirements.
Level 0Â Â Unable to function in the language.
For preschool and elementary, truthfully, 4.0 or up to native quality is a must. There has been a gross misconception about placing weak signing workers in preschool and elementary because all these poor signers only need to use simple language. No…children are at their critical time of language development when their brains are absorbing rich linguistic features the most in their entire lives. By age of 8 years, the window of language development starts closing down.
Students with a strong foundation in language from having exposure of strong language models during their preschool and elementary can handle weaker signing teachers better than if they had weak signing teachers in the beginning. This is undercurrent water that can drag down students to what is an infamous 4th grade literacy dead end and being a “semi-lingual†(weak in both languages) damaged goods.
Anne Marie Baer
An interesting article, Anne. Thanks for sharing with us. I have a question. What about these sign=supported English and their use in elementary classrooms?
Grady, thanks for providing more information. I do agree MDE should have included the job description about possessing fluency in ASL. Also they SHOULD provide reasonably adequate fund for evaluation and ongoing training in ASL for teachers and staff workers to prevent this situation from happening.
I am now doing ASL assessment for teachers and staff workers at Colorado School for the Deaf on contract. What I do is an informal in depth assessment of their signing skills and make recommendations how they can improve their signing skills. Later on these workers after having a grace time to polish their ASL skills will take a formal ASL Proficiency Interview and be rated by a group of professional raters working at full-time at a place outside the community. I cannot name the group right now because it has yet to offer a national wide service but hopefully in the near future it will happen. Results will be considered for continuing employment on contract, granting permanent position, promotion, merits, and tenure.
As a former rater at full time for 5 years and currently working on my doctoral in language development, acquisition, and assessment, I have seen many good teachers and workers in Deaf Ed programs, those with good visual aptitudes and motivation do learn and use ASL well. In hunch these people well respected by deaf students and workers, I can say many of them are approaching to 3.0 of proficiency scale, out of the highest, 5.0, for native – native like quality in signing. Weaker signers start at around 2.5 and go below. The ideal level is 3.5 as best as possible for middle to H.S. teaching and work positions. The higher is always best, no question about it.
This is a general description of each language proficiency level used in language proficiency testing for years. It is to give you an idea of what I am trying to describe ASL second language signers and their proficiency level.Â
Level 5Â Â Signing proficiency is equivalent to that of sophisticated native signer
or appears native-like.
Level 4Â Â Able to use the language fluently and accurately on all levels
pertinent to professional needs and broadly in social settings although do not demonstrate native quality.
Level 3Â Â Able to sign ASL sufficient structural accuracy and vocabulary to participate
well in most formal and informal conversations on practical, social, and professional needs.
Level 2Â Â Able to satisfy general social demands and limited work requirements
Level 1 Â Able to satisfy routine needs and minimum courtesy requirements.
Level 0Â Â Unable to function in the language.
For preschool and elementary, truthfully, 4.0 or up to native quality is a must. There has been a gross misconception about placing weak signing workers in preschool and elementary because all these poor signers only need to use simple language. No…children are at their critical time of language development when their brains are absorbing rich linguistic features the most in their entire lives. By age of 8 years, the window of language development starts closing down.
Students with a strong foundation in language from having exposure of strong language models during their preschool and elementary can handle weaker signing teachers better than if they had weak signing teachers in the beginning. This is undercurrent water that can drag down students to what is an infamous 4th grade literacy dead end and being a “semi-lingual†(weak in both languages) damaged goods.
Anne Marie Baer
An interesting article, Anne. Thanks for sharing with us. I have a question. What about these sign=supported English and their use in elementary classrooms?
December 3rd, 2006 at 8:26 pm
Elizabeth…Thanks for this infomrmation. Just wanted the bloggers to know that these 4 hearing teachers who cannot sign are just the most recent to be recruited by Pamela Hervey. She told them that they did not have to have sign language skills upon hire. Which went against the policy in the handbook, which requires all staff to sign at all times on campus. Not to mention the directive of the MDE that all new hires must meet highly qualified status or dual certification in deafness and content area. The prinicpal’s motivation was to hire more african american teachers regardless of credentials. Many of them were recruited and hired from her church congregation as she feels it is God who has deemed her the one to help her church members with regards to a job. For the record, many people at the school feel there should be a balance in the ratio of the race with regards to the teachers. One serious issue is that the one deaf education program in the state is enrolled by mostly white students majoring in deaf education. And with the lack of recruiting out of state by MDE for qualified deaf ed. teachers, this leaves most of the candidates applying for teaching jobs being the students from the one program in the state to offer deaf ed. Basically, these teachers would have never been hired by someone with any understanding of deaf ed. or sensitivty to deaf culture and ASL!!!!! Yes the teachers were in the wrong for applying, but the ball falls directly in the court of the former principal and the superintendent who allowed the hiring of these teachers. MDE trusted the administrators to do the appropriate thing for the students and their education. Afterall, that is what they were charged to do and paid to do!
December 3rd, 2006 at 10:11 pm
To answer Elizabeth’s question, What about these sign=supported English and their use in elementary classrooms?
You are talking about sim-com. I have written about this explaining why many sim-com either degrades both languages used simultaneously or one performing better another. Let me post my explanation on my website.
I know many people who uses sim-com do not intent to oppress anyone, they simply did not realize what happens when they use sim-com. Check at
http://web.mac.com/annemariebaer/iWeb/meaningwell/foreveryone.html
Anne Marie
December 3rd, 2006 at 10:19 pm
What about American Sign Language
instructor?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:43 pm
Straight Talker, how could she do that? recruit unqualified workers from her church? These students need teachers who know their stuff. Tell MDE to recruit in deaf newsletters and schools with deaf ed programs.
Anne, thanks for the link. I’ll check that out.
December 5th, 2006 at 12:35 am
George, do you mean deaf students taking ASL. I agree, every Deaf Ed program should offer ASL curriculum for deaf students, no question about this.
December 5th, 2006 at 12:47 am
The issue of balancing the ratio of African America teachers and students who are mostly African America is important. It is not the matter of skin color but it is culture and identity. Black teachers and students do have their own cultural rules in classroom, for example, their way of maintaining attention and turntaking.
Schools in locals where there are more Black or Spanish culture need to work with local Deaf Ed programs to recruit more typical teachers for better ratio.
I recommend MDE and MSD administrators contact Dept of Ed at Gallaudet University for their recommendations how to solve ratio and language proficiency issues. I believe they can offer advices and priorities in consideration.
December 5th, 2006 at 9:57 pm
Hi again. I cannot answer why Pam Hervey did what she did, other than to tell you that in the past when she interviewed for the supt. position at the school and she was asked “why do you want to take on the supt. position?” She replied that she wanted to hire more African American staff. She did not say deaf African American staff nor deaf staff. She did not say to establish MSD as one of the top deaf schools in the nation. Nothing to do with deaf people, their language and their culture! Shame on her. She has been seen saying that God told her in the bible that it was her church’s responsibility to help its congregation to find work. This appears to me that she has no respect for deaf people, their language, nor their culture!!! She was charged with the responsibility to educate those DEAF students at MSD and she failed at that miserably! You are absolutely correct these kids deserve the very best educators available and those willing to live and teach in Mississippi. I feel that Mrs. Edwards will take your advice and will be recruitng nation wide for candidates to work at the school. She has a real heart for deaf students and their needs. I mean come on, she grew up in a deaf home and has spent her career trying to assist teachers in being the very best communicators and teachers that they can possibly be. Her email address at the school is sgedwards@mde.k12.ms.us. I feel confident that she would welcome your positive words of support and constructive suggestions. So far the kids have welcomed her to the building and have been very excited, releived, and appreciative of her leadership. They can feel at ease to communicate with her and never fear not being understood. Just look at the elementary department that she has been in charge of for just one year!!! Wow, it is heaven in that building. Maybe now she will work her magic with the secondary department and with the Mississippi Department of Education. I can confidently say that I feel she will not be looking to her hearing church congregation for teacher candidates, instead looking for those with degrees in deaf education and the most qualified and fluent users of American Sign Language! Sorry I couldn’t answer your original question!
December 6th, 2006 at 5:03 pm
Incredible about Hervey’s attitude. I hope Dept of Education learned their mistake.
Great that Edwards has her heart in the right place. She may want to consult the deaf community surrounding MSD for ideas, like recruiting for volunteers to work with the deaf students while she looks elsewhere for qualified deaf education teachers. hmm?
April 25th, 2007 at 5:30 am
Thank You