Dirty Red Angel wrote:
I'd love to learn BSL and tried to years ago but they cancelled the course and I don't have anyone to practice with or use it on so it probably wouldn't be worth it......
loads of people say this and I can see why it would put people off. There is usually a deaf pub group in your city, where people go to learn, practice and just mingle.
I know where the ones in London are and Glasgow, not sure about anywhere else though!
Sorry to ask,
But why do you want to make it a GCSE? I can understand why you want to make it a qualification and I agree it should be but I don’t think it should be a GCSE.
Cons against the GCSE are:
Cons against BSL as a GCSE are:
Why not make it a Diploma or NVQ, as these are more recognised qualifications for businesses?
Why not create your own governing body and produce your own international qualification?
Please do not see this as a negative, I agree there should be a qualification but I disagree completely that it should be made into a GCSE.
After a quick google: I found http://www.signature.org.uk/page.php?content=10
This site offers "offical" qualifications in BSL it says and there is even an NVQ in them
"Signature Level 3 NVQ Certificate in British Sign Language (QCF)
uses the UK Occupational Language Standards (CILT, 2010),
which define competent performance in British Sign Language
(BSL) skills in both receptive and productive units."
Adding to my previous post there does seem to be qualifcations in BSL, so why make it a GCSE?
Once again i would like to state, i agree there should be qualifications and im glad there is a NVQ in it, but i dont think it should be a GCSE, just my opinion.
There are already NVQ's in Sign Language, you are not allowed to teach it in schools. The NVQ's are designed for hearing people who sign not tailored to the deaf. NVQ's prepare people to become interpreters. Its a standard qualification for people who WORK with deaf people. We are expected to attain level 3 ...which would be like Primary English to a BSL user.
An NVQ tells us that someone can use sign language, there is no curricular area. BSL would be treated as a foreign language subject which would be beneficial to our students who basically fail most of their GCSEs due to them being far to heavy in written English. The avg Deaf adult has the reading level and vocabulary of a 6/7 year old. With the GCSE they'd be able to study deaf cinema, drama, grammar... its all there and not touched in NVQ
Having a GCSE in BSL should be as normal as a GCSE in English, Welsh,... There is a Gaelic standard grade and well thats less beneficial than BSL in my opinion.
bottom line is, if you don't agree, don't sign it.
I am fully aware that Scotland (assume you're from there too) don't have GCSE's they have Standard Grades, which I myself sat and to be honest once one part of the country recognises the need for it to be picked up by S-Grades. I am pretty sure that Signature would not let it be purely for English students. It would get the ball rolling and Signature are the governing body of all BSL qualifications in the UK.
It isn't the official sign language of the world only for the UK, every country has their own sign language.
Maybe you'd have to see deaf teenagers struggle in school to realise the importance of allowing them to access a subject without an adult signing everything for them, changing the vocabulary for them, explaining things that are not real enough (they dont do abstract thinking very well) ... to understand why its a good positive move in education.
Can I just clarify is this a GCSE for deaf children to obtain? So they obtain a GCSE in BSL like someone could French /Spanish etc etc
Or can anyone obtain it (assuming it went ahead?)
for deaf learners which would be open to hearing children who use bsl (ie deaf parents/siblings/family) discrimination laws wouldn't allowe hearing people to not be allowed to sit it!
occhiverdi wrote:
for deaf learners which would be open to hearing children who use bsl (ie deaf parents/siblings/family) discrimination laws wouldn't allowe hearing people to not be allowed to sit it!
No, no I know that and that's not how I meant it - was just wondering x
Dirty Red Angel wrote:
occhiverdi wrote:
for deaf learners which would be open to hearing children who use bsl (ie deaf parents/siblings/family) discrimination laws wouldn't allowe hearing people to not be allowed to sit it!
No, no I know that and that's not how I meant it - was just wondering x
i just typed it in a sh*** way.... i meant kids would be allowed to choose it if they had the skills in place.
horny-youngcouple, 23M, 31F wrote:
Once again i would like to state, i agree there should be qualifications and im glad there is a NVQ in it, but i dont think it should be a GCSE, just my opinion.
Hello, Sorry that this opinion may seem different. At a Younge age I was shy to talk with other kids, even though I wasn't deaf or had troublee talking nauturally I found sign language an eay way to tell people how I was feeling. Yes It was only the basics but it still helped. NOw think how it could help a kid who actuallycan't speak or hear correctly... if I found it so much help, wouldn'y someone who actually needs to comunicate this way find it even more helpful?
Sorry I've been held back for so long due to UK boudaries in education. I really think dign language should be in gsces.... flower rangering is oone and I think sign is more important..... rambling again sorry hope I get my point across.
The Nymphomaniac wrote:
horny-youngcouple, 23M, 31F wrote:
Once again i would like to state, i agree there should be qualifications and im glad there is a NVQ in it, but i dont think it should be a GCSE, just my opinion.
Hello, Sorry that this opinion may seem different. At a Younge age I was shy to talk with other kids, even though I wasn't deaf or had troublee talking nauturally I found sign language an eay way to tell people how I was feeling. Yes It was only the basics but it still helped. NOw think how it could help a kid who actuallycan't speak or hear correctly... if I found it so much help, wouldn'y someone who actually needs to comunicate this way find it even more helpful?
Sorry I've been held back for so long due to UK boudaries in education. I really think dign language should be in gsces.... flower rangering is oone and I think sign is more important..... rambling again sorry hope I get my point across.
flower arranging is a GCSE!? lol hilarious I didn't know that!! good point Nympho!
RE: GCSE's not meaning much to employers. It would be as valuable to a deaf students as a hearing student having gcse English.
Well my school added a disability unit onto it and flower arranging was one of the GCSE options, there were a few others along similar libnes.... in all honesty I prefered my mums options of victorian lingerie as a a level..... but things have changed.
The Nymphomaniac wrote:
Well my school added a disability unit onto it and flower arranging was one of the GCSE options, there were a few others along similar libnes.... in all honesty I prefered my mums options of victorian lingerie as a a level..... but things have changed.
Our kids usually do entry level as the English is too difficult as is the vocabulary even in the most practical of subjects. It takes a lot of great signing staff to make sure everything is changed into easier vocabulary as well as knowing the signs that we use.
occhiverdi wrote:
The Nymphomaniac wrote:
Well my school added a disability unit onto it and flower arranging was one of the GCSE options, there were a few others along similar libnes.... in all honesty I prefered my mums options of victorian lingerie as a a level..... but things have changed.
Our kids usually do entry level as the English is too difficult as is the vocabulary even in the most practical of subjects. It takes a lot of great signing staff to make sure everything is changed into easier vocabulary as well as knowing the signs that we use. We also have to withdraw them from lessons to teach them/prepare them for exams.... one subject where they dont need us to hold their hand would be brilliant
The school usually makes them start GCSE and once they are failing horribly then they go oh not a good idea lets change to the easy course...
Signed up, my children are in a primary school which includes this city's hearing impaired unit, having spent time in school as a parent helper, school governor and a qualified but not working teacher I have seen how difficult it can be for some of their classmates to keep up. Even with support, and the school does an amazing job, the gap in learning will increase as they progress through the education system.
Any help has to be welcomed and the boost to self esteem from being able to suceed in an exam shouldnt be underestimated.
xGGx
ghostgirl wrote:
Signed up, my children are in a primary school which includes this city's hearing impaired unit, having spent time in school as a parent helper, school governor and a qualified but not working teacher I have seen how difficult it can be for some of their classmates to keep up. Even with support, and the school does an amazing job, the gap in learning will increase as they progress through the education system.
Any help has to be welcomed and the boost to self esteem from being able to suceed in an exam shouldnt be underestimated.
xGGx
totally agree, its heart breaking to have children trying to grasp English while trying to keep up with GCSE's. Let me point out not ALL deaf children have learning issues, I know many great, successful deaf people but a lot of them do have gaps in their learning which hinders the over all experience.
ps GG , hope i dont know anyone in your unit ! :)
Signed!
I have some good friends who are hearing impaired. Fantastic cause. Will send the link to a bunch of others, too.
ruffledsheets wrote:
Signed!
I have some good friends who are hearing impaired. Fantastic cause. Will send the link to a bunch of others, too.
thankyou so much :) I've gotten it out on twitter and to all my friends.... :D
added to my RL facebook page too
xGGx
The problem with letting them just be NVQs is that you have to go out of your way to do it, meaning that only those who intend to use it, or have the time/funds to indulge in a fancy for a course, can have access. This not only means that it comes too late for deaf kids who would benefit from having it from an early age, but also reduces the number of BSL 'speakers' among the hearing community, meaning that it's less likely a deaf person can find someone who speaks 'their language' in a company or meeting or what have you. Ideally having the equivalent of an NVQ Level 1 of it in schools at GCSE level, then more intensive options for higher-grade NVQs at a later level should they choose to follow up on it, would mean that most people going out into the work force would have at least a passing affinity with the language.
I don't think it can be compared to English as regards devising a curriculum, because to most it will be a 'foreign' language, and thus could and should be taught in the same way as kids learn French or German or whatever. after all, if they can teach a new language as a course, they can use the exact same method for BSL, so it's not completely out there as a concept.
To be honest, while I know the idea is to teach deaf kids so they know it better, I'd see it as equally beneficial teaching it to all kids of that age bracket, since it not only helps the deaf kids to be able to communicate better and improve their general literacy levels and so forth, but by making it almost standard that everyone can 'speak' BSL to some degree, it allows more people to be able to understand them if they choose to or have to sign instead of talking. The friend I mentioned could not speak at all: he'd been deaf from birth, and even now as an adult he can't form coherant words most of the time. But he can sign fluently and with ease. Trouble comes when he has to communicate with someone who can't sign. He can lip read near-perfectly, but finds it hard to respond, often having to resort to writing stuff down, which he finds quite demeaning. That could be avoided by having most younger adults coming out into the workforce forearmed with even a basic ability to sign and understand those signing to them.
Getting to the stage where you're fluent, or could teach others, yes, that should be voluntary, but there should be some form of Level 1 course that is given to every young person to try and bridge this gap.
level 1 is available and its VERY basic... sadly its all money money and you have to register as a centre for the kids to learn it along side employing a deaf (trained in the course) bsl trainer.
There is so much red tape we've tried to get past with no luck! sadly SEN are getting the biggest budget cuts in all this money saving crap and I know of some boroughs that have 1 teacher of the deaf to 90 kids!!! We're not helping we're hindering!
from what ive heard they will treat it as a foreign language for non BSL users and they will create something tougher and more first language for BSL "mother tounge" users.
Totally agree with communication, it breaks my heart when my kids panic about going out to the real world as they stuggle with communication but on the other hand so many cope with no issues that even i'm surprised as they are full on signers!!!
:)