Look, Morons! Sign Language isn't misbehaving!

The BBQ Pit
1

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C11335%2C00.html

Hot off the press! In New Jersey, Branchburg school official punishes a Hard of Hearing student for, get this, USING HER LANGUAGE TO COMMUNICATE!

The reason given for said punishment is that her use of Sign Language on the bus is a safety hazard.

What I, personally, don’t understand is how the bus driver and the school’s principal BOTH having their heads up their asses does not constitute a safety hazard.

Oh, and the reason she’s Hard of Hearing? According to her parents, the school didn’t do a good job of keeping fireworks out of the school and another student set off a bottle rocket in a hallway.

I wonder what the principal and bus driver would say if she took to passing notes written in Sign Language instead?
[ur]http://www.signwriting.org

BTW, yes I’m pissed. Write the principal of Stony Brook School and let him know he’s a moron!

2

Wish there had been specific examples cited in the article. On the surface this definitely looks heavy-handed and baseless.

I wonder though, I can imagine a couple of scenarios where the action taken could result. Just theorizing, perhaps they were antagonizing/defaming/inciting other students with their “speech”.

Perhaps since the driver doesn’t know sign language he can’t police what is being said. Perhaps the hearing impaired individual has been asked to stop such behavior and has refused to comply.

Still seems heavy-handed.

And this is of significance why?

3

That there is existing litigation between the school and the family suggests that there might be things going on behind the scenes not captured in the story.

And of course, institutional defendants generally don’t comment on litigation, so they can’t get their side of the story out.

But I suspect that even after all the pro-school facts are aired, I’m still going to have to recalibrate my stupidometer to reflect a new maximum value.

4

I, personally, would say that this bit

shows that the school district neither has a clue as to what Sign Language is nor do they have any specific examples as to it causing a safety problem.

And what would those be? Sign Language is quite obviously not “flashing gang signs” so that’s out. Well, it’s out unless you’re a complete moron, which the district officials appear to be, IMHO.

I’ll be nice this time, but don’t expect to come off unscathed the next time you allude, in any manner, that Sign Language is not a language. It is speech, it’s just not conveyed via the vocal cords.

And how could those other students be defamed if they didn’t understand the language? If they’re antagonized by someone’s unfamiliar speech, shold we also punish those who speak Spanish or Arabic or another audible language in the presence of the ignorant?

Let’s see…a quiet conversation (actually a silent conversation) in a language not known to the driver…yeah, that’s a really disruptive form of behaviour. Seems to me the driver should be disciplining anyone who’s causing a ruckus over the silent conversation. What’s next? Banning of winking or knowing nods?

There’s a difference between “ask” and “tell.” The child was ordered to quit communicating in her language and threatened with suspension if she failed to obey.

Damn right it seems that way because it is heavy-handed. I’m thinking it also goes against the AWDA.

Evidence of retalitory punishment by the school district because they’re already being sued by the girl’s parents, perhaps. Anyway, you’d think the district would have the good sense to not screw up again so soon.

Whoops. We’ve already established they don’t have good sense.

p.s. Could one of the mods please correct the url tag in my previous posting? Thanks.

5

There’s a thread on this in MPSMS, with a link to a different article. Apparently, the safety hazard is constituted by the fact that other kids are getting out of their seats in order to come over to tease and harass the girl for using sign language. So, she’s being punished for the bad behavior of the other kids. Isn’t life wonderful?

6

I never noticed that thread in MPSIMS…link (or to the article, even better)?

That’s even stupider than the vague reference to the safety hazard in this version…

7

So let me get all this straight. Due to the alleged negligence of the school, the girl became hearing impaired. Now, when she tries to combat her disability by using sign language, she is being punished for it. Because it causes a disturbance. Because when people are too different from you, it’s easier to silence them, put them away, rather than take the extra time and energy to deal with their differences.

But wait, there’s more. Just now, Thea Logica tells us that the cause of the disturbance was the fact that other children were mocking her because she was using sign language. So, not only do we punish her for trying to combat her impairment, we ensure that she will grow up with feelings of inadequacy and social stigma, because the other kids are making fun of her. Easier to punish the victim rather than the victimizers.

Excuse me while I go to the bathroom and vomit. I hope that poor girl will be able to get past all the bullshit she has to deal with.

8

I don’t know ASL, but you bet your ass I know the “sign” to appropriately express my feeling toward the principal.

What a dumbass.

9

Here it is.

I posted it there, although I originally intended to post it in the Pit. In that link, you can find the email address for both the school principal and the local school district.

For the life of me, I can’t see how signing can be disruptive.

10

I’ve been trying to figure that out ever since I heard this story, but then it hit me–obviously the girl was
praying in Sign Language.

11

Things like this make me glad I’m not raising kids. How stupid. I thought this was quite humorous, however, in an odd kind of way:

From the school’s website, Newsletter section:

The poles? The POLES?!? What, voting booths were too convenient, so they went for something a bit more challenging? Do you have to climb higher to hit the lever for incumbents, or what? Does voting count as credit towards your P.E. requirement? Our educational system at work. :rolleyes:

12

Maybe they’ve replaced the traditional “election” with a flagpole-sitting contest. Whichever candidate stays up there longer wins. (PETA made them drop the “Swallowing Live Goldfish Run-Off”.)

13

Silly people. He’s not talking about flag poles.

What happens is when you vote in this town you are led into a room filled with POLISH PEOPLE! There, you tell the Poles (which should have been capitalized, gosh, those educators should no better) who you are going to vote for. Unfortunately, we are talking about native Polish people here, imported the day before. They don’t speak a word of English, so rarely does an actual vote get counted.

Ironically, every one of them understands sign lanugage, but that is breaking voting regulations.

14

{quote}I’ll be nice this time, but don’t expect to come off unscathed the next time you allude, in any manner, that Sign Language is not a language. It is speech, it’s just not conveyed via the vocal cords.

And how could those other students be defamed if they didn’t understand the language? If they’re antagonized by someone’s unfamiliar speech, shold we also punish those who speak Spanish or Arabic or another audible in the presence of the ignorant?{/quote}

A big one-finger salute to you for assuming that by putting quotes around the word speech I intended to belittle it’s meaning. In retrospect I should have put it in bold. Sign language, foreign languages, and made-up languages are all SPEECH and should be treated as such.

Are you implying it is OK to throw around racial slurs, hate speech, and defamatory statements as long as those it is directed at cannot understand what you are saying?

Point of the matter is that the cite in your OP had very few facts from which to make a judgment.

I read the other article cited, it states that the board of education differs with the parents view of events leading up to the threat of suspension.

I refuse to automatically assume that children and the handicapped are inherently innocent. Handicapped people are capable of being victimizers as well as victims.

Give both sides the benefit of innocent until proven guilty. If everything being alleged is true, then the school officials are being petty and acting like imbeciles.

15

Um…Hibbins? That is the common assumption of what quotes mean around a single word that doesn’t, in context, appear to be a direct quote. Just about everybody I’ve ever seen respond to such a construction, in real life or on the Internet, takes it to be the equivalent of the “so-called” or “self-defined” constructs. In other words, “this doesn’t really mean what any normal person would think it means”. So I’d have to go with Monty’s take on it, or at least realize that it’s an understandable misreading of that section of your post. We don’t read minds.

As for the rest, I have to admit that I tend to be biased in these cases toward the individuals rather than the institutions. But I’m an antisocial individualist curmudgeon-in-training, so…

16

Answered by another poster above.

So it appears.

Exactly my point. Also, Sign Language is not English. It is a language foreign to the English language. It is a language foreign to the Spanish language. It is a separate language.

Where the <ahem> do you glean that from? I meant exactly what I posted and other folks apparently understood it exactly as posted. Maybe this’ll make it easier: How do those other students know if they’re being complimented if they don’t know the language? Anyway, the speech of the student in question was not directed towards the ignorant, but to others who understand the language she uses.

Sometimes all you need is a few facts. Anyway, I asked how the use of Sign Language could be considered a hazard. I’m still waiting for an answer.

Well, they can differ all they want, but the article referred to the letter received by the parents:

This leads me to believe that it appears to Westerholm that the crux of the issue is the child’s continued use of Sign Language and for that she shall be punished.

I do not, nor have I ever implied, that I hold to the view that such individuals are automatically innocent.

You shall never receive the title of “Master of the Obvious.”

I feel that it’s kind of obvious what the proof here is so I started this thread. And I posted a link to the news. Since the principal wrote down that he’s punishing the child for using Sign Language, that’s proof that he’s punishing the child for using Sign Language. Now, if he’d written that the child was cursing, and had proof that she was, that would be a different story.

Agreed.

17

By the way, Hibbins, “it’s” is not the possessive form of “it.” The possessive does not have an apostrophe. It doesn’t look good to use a contraction of “it is” to mean “belonging to it.”

[ul]possessive its
contraction it’s[/ul]

18

I agree that we are only hearing one side of the story here, and that the school is precluded by the requirements of not speaking on subjects where court action is pending from telling whatever the other side may be.

I also agree that the principal’s statement is clearly out of line – whatever the kid might have been saying in sign language might call for discipline, but not the fact of her using it.

Finally, might I note that fingerspelling can be used to do a literal rendering of English, but Ameslan is a language with its own “vocabulary” of signs and its own syntax and grammar, expressed through signs rather than through spoken words. It’s as distinct a language as any other spoken tongue. (Which makes me wonder what a English > Ameslan > English rendering of something familiar in a Babelfish context might produce.)

Two links for further information follow. Apparently, according to the Newark Star-Ledger, the advocates for kids with disabilities feel that there is in fact a case worth pursuing here.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/signlang_ban010418.html

http://www.nj.com/njcommunities/ledger/somerset/index.ssf%3F/njcommunities/ledger/somerset/12f9fa2.html

Thanks for bringing this up, Monty!

19

Monty,

Thanks for correcting my grammar!

Is it all right then if I sign to others what I think of you if you are able to see and understand what I am signing? Even if I am being defamatory?

Why is it ignorant to not understand sign language? Are you fluent in all languages? I’m not.

20

At risk of generating rather more heat than light:

Speech and language are not the same thing. Language may be unspoken (e.g. written or signed) and speech may not be language (e.g. the babbling of an infant).

I don’t think that putting the word speech in inverted commas implies that Sign Language is not a language. It might be conventional to use the word “speech” to describe what people do when they communicate in Sign Language (then again, it might not; I don’t know), but it doesn’t, in that context, carry its usual meaning (i.e. vocalisation).