Do you agree that Sign Language ought to be part of every school's curriculum?

Answer 1

yes!!!

Answer 2

I think that Sign Language is a very good language to know, but I don't agree that it ought to be part of every school's curriculum, any more than every school can teach Spanish, French, Italian, German, Dutch, Gaelic, Latin, Polish, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean. Schools cannot be responsible for everything anyone ought to know or needs to know. Schools give people the tools to learn and then it is up to the person to seek out the places that can teach any specialty skills needed or desired.

Answer 3

Yes.
I work in an organisation which employs a couple of deaf guys and I feel mute myself when I'm around them. They're very friendly and we wave at each other in passing but it's very frustrating not to be able to communicate with them properly. I've picked up a little from websites on it so I can be polite, but I find myself wishing I knew it already! If it were taught in schools, deaf people would feel more included. It's not like learning Braille, that's for an individual to do, sign language actually works on many levels:
It's not only a useful tool when speaking to deaf people, how about when you're on the noisy Tube or in a crowded bar trying to find out what your mate wants from only 2 feet away and still getting it wrong...?

It's a helpful life skill, is not a hard language to begin learning, especially when young, and it could be optional after a certain age.

Answer 4

Yes

Sign language is very useful in situations where you either can't hear (noisy club) or you don't want to disturb someone (someone on the phone).

It is obviously useful if you are communicating wiht a deaf persn.

It also introduces you to different language structures, different grammer.

Garfields - Sign languages bare no reseblence to spoken languages. British Sign Language is very different to American Sign Language - even the alphabet is different yeet both countries are English speaking.

Having said that sign languages are closer to each other than many spoken languages so if we all knew our own national sign language when we met people from other countries we could communicate because of the structure of the language.

Or maybe everyone should learn international sign language.

Answer 5

I think it is more important to teach one language first, perhaps English in England.

There is far too much on the curriculum as it is, and most students do not have the time or inclanation to do anything more than surface learn what there is already. If anything, there is a strong argument for teaching kids less, but in greater detail.

It would be nice if subjects, including sign language, first aid, and more unusaual sports could be made avliable as extra curriculuum activities.

Answer 6

I think that it is a great idea! My little boy has a speech difficulty called verbal dyspraxia, and he is learning sign language to help him communicate, his whole class is learning it as well in order to communicate with him. The kids love using it with him. I think it would be really useful to integrate it with reading. My son is 4 1/2 and when we read books together we use the signs for the words and it has greatly improved his word recognition. We first say the word while signing, then finger spell the word, then say the word with the appropriate sign again, he's fascinated by it and it's helped turn reading into a game, so I definately think all kids could benefit from learning sign language.

Answer 7

I think it would be a good elective to offer students-so that they have the option to take it.
Braille is not a language, it's a form of reading for a person who has a sight impairment-so it's not a good argument for this topic of discussion. It has nothing to do with the idea of sign language being part of a school's curriculum.

Answer 8

Many classrooms that I've worked with have integrated the basic signs for "yes", "no", "bathroom" and "please." It really helps with having the students communicate with the teacher without interrupting the class. I don't know about teaching the entire sign language as part of the curriculum but I like the small integration with everyday learning.

Answer 9

yes.
i saw a documentary on new born babies once & it put over the point that babies only a few weeks old can be taught to comunicate through sign.
this is only simple gestures like when hungry, need changing or are tired.
this in my opinion would ease the stress burden on young mothers, who incidentally will have left school in the not too different past & so should still be able to remember some basics.
as this becomes the norm in society then we would make more use of our body language recognition abillities & become more aware.
also i think that there would be a significant drop in child battering as the kids aint likely to be screaming the place down all the time & gettin on ya ****!!!

Answer 10

I believe that it should be among the foreign language classes, but sometimes schools or areas don't have the resources to provide classes in every language. For example, this is our first full year offering American Sign Language. We also offer Spanish, Spanish for Spanish Speakers, German, French and Khmer for Khmer speakers.

Obviously it makes sense for us to teach what is spoken around us, but without qualified teachers, we couldn't offer programs in these languages. Sometimes you can't hire a teacher to teach just one subject, and if your school is too small to support 5 classes of something, the teacher may have to teach other things as well.

For example, last year, our sign teacher taught piano and 2 classes, but the demand was large enough this year for 6 sections.

Answer 11

Of course!! Mainstream schools already teach French and Spanish don't they? Why not sign language as well? Not only will it make education, the work place and services more accessible to Deaf people, in line with UK law, but also I'm sure it would be useful to hearing people on occassions as well, when it is not appropriate or not possible to use voice.