To think that it wouldn't be too difficult or costly to teach basic sign language in schools?

[Theicingontop]

Not expecting a five year old to sit and learn the entire BSL, but I think it would be nice if children were taught the basics. Maybe they do in some schools, but none I've ever heard of. Why do you think that is? Am I being unreasonable in thinking that it wouldn't be that difficult to do?

Several of our support staff and MDS are Native speakers of Spanish, and the children practise on them. Works well.

I don't think I'm the only parent who places importance on modern languages.

Just not indigenous languages of the British Isles?

My ds1 is deaf , he doesn't sign and gets very upset that people assume he can't communicate orally because of his disability.

I actually find it frustrating with some (and I don't know you, or your son, so this is something from my experience of talking to some deaf adults) deaf people can't sign.

I had a conversation at deaf club that went like this

X - something unitelligable
Me - sorry? I didn't get that
X-something unintelligable but I cought the words 'didn't know you'
Me didn't know what?
X - with a very strong deaf voice - if you didn't know I was deaf you would think I was hearing because I speak well.
Me - er........ ok

We teach basic Makaton to all children in my school. There are a number of pupils who use it so it is essential for communication. Tbh, the children pick it up far quicker than the adults.

Leathers, not leathers in my previous post! Yes, they get proper practise with a native speaker and can also hear about their experiences in their home country and other cultural things - priceless. I think this is particularly important with Deaf teachers as it gives a positive role model of a Deaf person in a professional settings which helps to undo any negative stereotypes of Deaf people not being able to work etc

Learners! Learners! Argh.....

Why do marathon? Bsl is a recognised language far better to do that, they have lunch time club at my dd school? My dd is deaf and uses sign so lots of her friends are picking it up.

Makaton... Damn autocorrect

Makaton as a second language within a school, or a nation would enable more people to communicate with a wider range of individuals with SN, from ASDs to Downs to Deaf and if embedded widely would assist cross-cultural communication with non-English speakers.
Easier and faster to learn for those who have no direct links to the Deaf community and thus less motivation to learn a completely new and complex language.

The trouble is that many BSL users are even more marginalised, and some people can't have implants. My dh visits deaf schools on a weekly basis and encounters many young people who are not able to communicate effectively aurally. Plus I have worked with many non-verbal people with SN who used Makaton. I do think that it would not be cost effective to teach every child BSL, however Makaton teaches many signs which are recognisable in BSL, with a few glaring exceptions, it is also widely used with babies and people with SN, so anyone working in a care situation could use their knowledge. I didn't say that the TAs just have a half day training session, it is ongoing, but it is they who lead it in the school. BSL would require native speakers, separate lessons as the grammar is different and more intensive training.

Whilst I am under no illusions that my dc could communicate with my dh's collegues fluently, they can use enough signs to augment their speech to aid understanding. If I met the proverbial Manderin speaker and they said 'me name x is' I might not be able to discuss philosophy with them, but there would be enough basis to communicate, that is why I think Makaton is useful.

Our school teaches it in addition to their attempts to teach French, so it is not exclusive, but that would be better if there were native speakers.

My dd is profoundly deaf and implanted, attending a mainstream primary school. Her main form of communication is Sign Supported English, which uses BSL signs to re-enforce spoken language. She has a 1:1 support worker who is qualified in BSL. Her 1:1 has worked hard within the school and SSE has become part of everyday life within the class. There are no separate lessons and no set teaching, the children pick it up signs naturally as they see it everyday.

The school use the Talk for Writing programme and the head teacher has worked with dd's 1:1 to incorporate the signs into the programme. They are also starting a signing club at lunch and after school for children.

The level of support and inclusion we have received is fantastic and I hope it continues into secondary school. I don't think it would take copious amounts of time or money, just a great deal of enthusiasm, a dedicated member of staff and support from the school.

BSL is really hard to learn. I failed BSL level 1 and for not for lack of trying.

If a teacher is going to teach BSL then they need to be at least BSL level 2. (roughly GCSE standard) They aren't going to learn much BSL in half a day. There is a lot more to BSL than a bit of finger spelling. I did use my BSL, only because I worked in a special school with Deaf children. It has to be remember that a lot of profoundly deaf people do not use BSL. Many people with profoundly deaf children use an aural approach. With the advent of cochelar implants fewer Deaf children are attending BSL medium schools.

I would rather children study a modern language. Most teachers have a GCSE in a modern language. There is no point in being taught BSL by someone who has no clue.

My son did a lunch time club for two years. The lady who taught him had BSL had level 2. My son has used his BSL once or twice. However I suspect he has forgotten it all.

My dd knew basic sign language that she learnt in nursery aged about 1-3. She was very good at it too, but has steadily forgotten everything. We use simple signs like "thank you" and "milk" and "biscuit" with DS now. Yanbu, they should incorporate sign language when talking to children for words they use often.

You've made some good points Reallytired but what you said about teachers needing at least Level 2 takes me back to the points I made in my earlier posts. A GCSE level qualification is not appropriate for teaching - level 2 does not provide anyone with sufficient skill to teach BSL. It's great for giving people the skills to converse in BSL to a certain point but thats as far as it goes. I still feel that the best way is a qualified Deaf teacher for all the reasons I've already explained. I know that it's not practical to have a fluent BSL user in every school all the time but there is a place for them to be part of the use of BSL in school life. However, I know I am living in the 'should' world rather than the real world!

christmasberry I think introducing basic Makaton would be a fairly straightforward way of helping the many children with speech and language/communication problems in mainstream education. I think it would also help children be more aware of disability within society, in a positive way. I think introducing BSL as an option for older children would be great, but as others have pointed out, it is a much more complicated language to learn.

But what a wonderful thing that this is BEING DISCUSSED.

Now to get out there and do some appropriate campaigning.

I am going to speak to the people I work for at the deaf charity - to see if this is something they can raise awareness about. My mother is also partially deaf - through typhoid fever as a child. It affected her whole life and the psychology of how she lived - because she felt so isolated.

Just not indigenous languages of the British Isles?

My son will have to be proficent in at least three to four modern languages if he wants to get a decent paid job,when he is an adult, where we currently live.

Four languages is his bet bet for maximising his opportunities if he wants to live/studywork elsewhere.

We (as in my family) can't afford to prioritise the indigenous languages of the British Isles at the expence of modern laguages, given the heavey language load expectations of the wider employment market.

If people think that English is enough and Britain will provide all the opportunities they think their kids will ever want or need then fair enough, they can afford to treat MFL like optional extras and choose something else.

However! If I could go back in time to my son's primary age, I'd happily swop my son's art and/or music lessons for sign language. Actually you can have both, source of constant grumpiness and tears those two were, been much better since he dropped them and he got to learn guitar with his own teacher.

Oh yeah, and RE, I'd swop that for sign language (if the school could afford the training and any required resources obviously)

But that is the problem really, different parents will see different subjects as priorities and would throw the mother of all hissy fits if the subjects I don't give a toss about were being swopped out in favour of something that they weren't opposed to...right until it threatened something they deemed invaluable for their child.

I think it would be beneficial to all children to learn some signing and to learn through signing. Around here a lot of schools are trialling some signing programmes which have shown some fab results in both communication and maths link to results.

The school I used to work at used to teach BSL to autistic children. (They had someone with a proper CADEP qualification and the children were prepared for level 1) It really helped the children with their communication in English. They learnt to make eye contact and understand people's expressions.

I feel that BSL should be available as a modern language at secondary level. It really does need to be taught by a qualified teacher. BSL is far more than Mr Tumble on something special. It has its own grammar and culture as much as French.

I feel that BSL needs to be made more of a part of British life. I feel that BSL should be available as an option to secondary school children. However it needs to be taught by someone qualified.

My school does Makaton. It was not cheap to implement and took the entire year's professional development budget.

We teach to the children as an augmented communication aid. We have very poor speech and language, due to a needy catchment.

I learned BSL growing up, it was the product of having a deaf friend mixed with my somewhat stubborn personality...I wasn't going to let the fact that she couldn't hear me, stop us being friends (4yo logic for you right there!) so she showed me the signs with her mum's help.

Learning it was great for my co-ordination, but I'm not sure about it being part of the main curriculum - too many other basics that are too important to replace. As part of an after school club though...that would be a really fun thing to have as an option.

Mr Tumble is not BSL, Mr Tumble is Makaton.

I don't think any subjects should be replaced, it should be used throughout the school day (not constantly), and in this way, children would pick it up. I think all children would benefit.

Is there clear evidence that this type skill is generally for the benefit of all children?

I'm just wondering how my own children would actually benefit from this.

BSL is far more than Mr Tumble on something special. It has its own grammar and culture as much as French.

That's why I think Makaton is better and more inclusive in this context. Lots of children (and adults, they do grow up don't forget!) with learning difficulties already have problems with language and need the simplified version. Also, as people have already pointed out, it would be wonderful to think that if we become impaired in later life there would be a simple language to communicate at least our basic needs, which could be understood by most people. If someone has been in an accident or had a stroke then BSL (with grammar and all) might be too much for them.

Lots of people here have asked the question about how will schools afford it? What will they drop in order to fund it? etc etc. I don't think it should be the responsibility of the schools to train staff, I think it should be a part of basic teacher training and be required for qualification to teach. But that's just me, infuriated by the non-existant training on any form of SN that my recently qualified teacher friend got, so I might be a little over-sensitive.

I ran a small sign language group for KS1 children but I only have level 1.

It was great. We role played with shops and cafes, pet shops and drs.

We all had quite simple shopping lists, menus and ailments. But it was fun nevertheless!

We also signed good morning and afternoon in my class, most of the children were able to recognise when their name was being signed for the register (it was a small class and we all had sign names) and follow simple instructions and answer simple questions (e.g. Would you like milk? yes please/no thank you).

Posting without reading the thread, and then will go back and read, but it occurred to me recently that BSL ought to be a joint official language of the country with English and everybody ought to be taught it from birth.

When you think of how many people lose their hearing in old age, if they - and the sales assistants, HCPs, family members, etc with whom they will be interacting - could already sign, wouldn't life be so much easier. :)