Do you plan on teaching LO sign language?

CaraLynn91 · May 2011

Just out of curiosty since plan on teaching DD.

TakeLuck · May 2011

A little. I've been working on "milk", "more", "all done", "Mommy" and "Daddy" with him. We have a book that we read almost every day that has a few other signs that I'll start using soon.

rachelb823 · May 2011

Most definitely, I am an interpreter & Deaf minister! With DS1, he signed a lot & then not as much as he learned to speak, but we still use it because we are actually around Deaf. That aside, he is WAY ahead in his language, & everyone says it's bc we taught him sign. No doubt it helped his language advance & helped him communicate at an earlier age. So far, with DS2 we are only using mom, dad, & milk but we need to sign more.

BTW, there is a FABULOUS video series called Signing Time, geared towards kids. Check your library. :-)

SamuelsMomma2010 · May 2011

Defiantly! I read in a recent edition of Parents magazine that it is helpful for boys because it helps them to be able to express themselves more easily therefore leads to fewer tantrums : )

TBLilyRose · May 2011

Maybe a few but I'm not going to be gung-ho about it.

saraboston · May 2011

There's a big difference between sign language (ASL) and "Baby Sign". ASL is a language but Baby sign is a giant load of crap. I'm an SLP and in grad school I worked on an multi-million dollar, nation-wide NIH grant and one of our findings was that normal hearing children whose mothers used baby sign had verbal language skills that were significantly below their normal hearing non-signing piers at 2 years old.

drea_raye · May 2011

We are. I plan on using the singing time videos (and it will be the tv that LO watches when I am desperate, but so far we watch it together in little bursts...)

I have really only started signing Milk to him... although mother, father, more, want, all done are all signs I want to introduce early.

I agree that it is better for language development and to ease frustration. I only worry that our caregiver or DH won't be as up on the signs, and then LO will still be frustrated that they don't understand him.

JustDoIt62009 · May 2011

Actually just finished watching Baby Signing Time with DD. It's the only TV she gets excited to watch, and will watch more than 5 minutes of it! We've been working on it consistently for a month now and she is starting to show signs that she understands when I sign milk before I show her her bottle. I don't know if she is just getting used to be doing it before her bottle or she understands what it means, but either way she's learning something. I think it will be great for communication.

It also helped on our 8 hour car drive this past week, it delayed a tantrum by at least 30 minutes and I plan on using it our international flight next week

RyAnsMoMMy123 · May 2011

saraboston:
There's a big difference between sign language (ASL) and "Baby Sign". ASL is a language but Baby sign is a giant load of crap. I'm an SLP and in grad school I worked on an multi-million dollar, nation-wide NIH grant and one of our findings was that normal hearing children whose mothers used baby sign had verbal language skills that were significantly below their normal hearing non-signing piers at 2 years old.

Huh, this is interesting. Can you elaborate? I'm honestly really interested in this...Also what is an SLP? Sorry for my stupid question.

ETA: Also, is the signing time considered "baby sign"?

sarag0116 · May 2011

Probably not.

ValentineGirl · May 2011

Yes, the infants at DS's daycare began to learn some basic ASL and we'll practice at home.

drea_raye · May 2011

Correct me if I am wrong... but I think signing time is ASL, and there is another program that is a baby signing program that isn't actual ASL...

CelticWife · May 2011

Not now. I know some ASL, and I am going to start teaching some to DS, but our pedi really recommends against the baby signs. She said that her patients who used it have (in general) been delayed in speaking and are harder to understand when they do start using words.

Firedancer1013 · May 2011

SLP= speech language pathologist, or speech therapist. I am also a SLP. I will not be doing baby sign but when he is old enough I will be teaching him at least to finger spell (asl) because it is a valuable tool to have and easy to learn.

daenikoffre · May 2011

I'm not sure.. I took 4 years of ASL in college, and have a few deaf friends, but because of that I'll probably teach him ASL as he grows, and not specifically focus on signs for babies.

JustDoIt62009 · May 2011

drea_raye:
Correct me if I am wrong... but I think signing time is ASL, and there is another program that is a baby signing program that isn't actual ASL...

Baby Signing Time and Signing Time is ASL- not sure about anything else.

skroops · May 2011

RyAnsMoMMy123:
saraboston:
There's a big difference between sign language (ASL) and "Baby Sign". ASL is a language but Baby sign is a giant load of crap. I'm an SLP and in grad school I worked on an multi-million dollar, nation-wide NIH grant and one of our findings was that normal hearing children whose mothers used baby sign had verbal language skills that were significantly below their normal hearing non-signing piers at 2 years old.

Huh, this is interesting. Can you elaborate? I'm honestly really interested in this...Also what is an SLP? Sorry for my stupid question.

ETA: Also, is the signing time considered "baby sign"?

I am also really interested if you could elaborate on this or link some of the studies that have showed that babies who have used signs to be delayed. I am a "language person" as well - I am a foreign language teacher and have done quite a bit of research on language acquisition of both first and second languages. I did a lot of reading on using sign language with babies before I started it with DD1 and everything I read said that it helped language development because it is teaching babies that a word/sign represents an object at such a young age even before they can verbalize it.

Zoey really picked up a lot of sign language before she was able to really talk and it was really great being able to communicate with her that way. It definitely didn't delay her speech at all. She is actually very advanced in her speech compared to her peers. (teachers at daycare have told me this, it is not just my opinion as her mother). She is also starting to learn spanish and knows quite a bit already, so I definitely dont think that teaching her sign has delayed her language in any way.

dNoodle · May 2011

We do plan to teach him. I have the Baby Signs DVDs, and now I'm starting to worry that we made the wrong decision. I would like to see some information on baby signs delaying verbal language, because from what I read, even using made-up signs helps them to assign names to objects (or feelings or people...whatever) and helps children to communicate thoughts before they have verbal language.

skroops · May 2011

dNoodle:
We do plan to teach him. I have the Baby Signs DVDs, and now I'm starting to worry that we made the wrong decision. I would like to see some information on baby signs delaying verbal language, because from what I read, even using made-up signs helps them to assign names to objects (or feelings or people...whatever) and helps children to communicate thoughts before they have verbal language.

This is exactly what I have read too. I think that I would prefer to use "real" signs but I used some simplified versions with Zoey and she even modified/made up some on her own. I know that one person's experience does not mean everyone will have the same success, but for us, the signs worked really well and I know it did not delay her language development at all. I would be really interested to see studies that using sign language with babies has adversely affected their long term language development. Everything that I have ever read, and my own experience suggests the exact opposite.

mom2case · May 2011

I plan to use a few basic signs. To the PP who was worried about babysitters, etc. not understanding the signs, they're very basic. A 2 minute tutorial would be enough for an adult to learn them.

Personally, I'm not planning on using DVDs or TV to teach my LO the signs. You can go to this website, https://www.signingsavvy.com/, and see 5 ASL words per day. I'm learning the signs I want LO to know and will teach new words to her when she gets the first few down.

As far as the whole language development debate, the only way baby sign language would delay speech is if the baby was planted in front of the TV to watch the DVDs and hardly ever talked to. DH and I want our LO to know simple sign language and basic Spanish. To teach her, we'll be interacting with her. A neighbor of mine uses the DVDs and the baby will repeat the sign and then stare at him to do it too. I personally think interaction is the most important element of language development, whether it be verbal or visual.

kxp004 · May 2011

skroops:
RyAnsMoMMy123:

saraboston:
There's a big difference between sign language (ASL) and "Baby Sign". ASL is a language but Baby sign is a giant load of crap. I'm an SLP and in grad school I worked on an multi-million dollar, nation-wide NIH grant and one of our findings was that normal hearing children whose mothers used baby sign had verbal language skills that were significantly below their normal hearing non-signing piers at 2 years old.

Huh, this is interesting. Can you elaborate? I'm honestly really interested in this...Also what is an SLP? Sorry for my stupid question.

ETA: Also, is the signing time considered "baby sign"?
I am also really interested if you could elaborate on this or link some of the studies that have showed that babies who have used signs to be delayed. I am a "language person" as well - I am a foreign language teacher and have done quite a bit of research on language acquisition of both first and second languages. I did a lot of reading on using sign language with babies before I started it with DD1 and everything I read said that it helped language development because it is teaching babies that a word/sign represents an object at such a young age even before they can verbalize it.
Zoey really picked up a lot of sign language before she was able to really talk and it was really great being able to communicate with her that way. It definitely didn't delay her speech at all. She is actually very advanced in her speech compared to her peers. (teachers at daycare have told me this, it is not just my opinion as her mother). She is also starting to learn spanish and knows quite a bit already, so I definitely dont think that teaching her sign has delayed her language in any way.

::lurking::

Sorry but I feel that is a load of bullsh*t... (the bolded part---we are also talking about children (peers) not platforms used to secure boats (piers)).... if one study found that should it take away what the SPOKESPERSON FOR AAP stated? here I'll cite the article and write verbatum what they said:

Q:Does baby sign language actually delay verbal language in many cases?

The short answer is no, according to Dr. Lynn Mowbray Wegner, a pediatrician in Chapel Hill, N.C., and a spokesperson for the American Academy of Pediatrics. In fact, signing is a very good ... err ... sign. It means your niece is communicating effectively, which is a major step at this point in her life.

Link here ---> click me!

Additionally, here is a youtube video of a cute one year old, Fireese, both signing and talking... click me!....basically, as you sign, talk too; this helps the child associate the sign (right side of brain), spoken word (left side of brain) with the object in question... which actually improves your child's understanding....

Here is a scientific journal article:

A review of: Crais, E., Watson, L., & Baranek, G. (2009). Use of Gesture Development in Profiling Children?s Prelinguistic Communication Skills American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 18 (1), 95-108 DOI: 10.1044/1058-0360(2008/07-0041)

The article listed above is summarized fairly well at this website here ---> click me!

And yet another good website ---> click me! <--- I found a really good analogy here that I will type: Just as babies learn to crawl before they can walk, Baby Signs gives them a developmentally appropriate way to communicate before they can talk. Once children learn to walk they no longer crawl because of the greater freedom walking affords them. Communication is the same way. While Baby Signs are useful before children have words, speech allows them the ability to communicate more quickly and more fully. As s child?s mind and body develops, he or she will naturally transition to speaking in order to convey ever more complex ideas and longer sentences. Far from getting in the way of the process, Baby Signs provides a bridge that helps the transition from no language to spoken language.

It should be noted that I found all of these articles by searching in google the following words: signing as baby delays speech.... which you would think would bring up evidence that says there will be a delay... instead everything I looked at showed the opposite was true

All of that being said: MH and I plan on teaching our child ASL, German, Spanish and of course our language English... I have done a lot of research on how to make sure that none of these languages are confused and joined together and found that you need to set aside times to in which to use each SPOKEN language, whereas with ASL it can be used all the time....

ETA:

The Baby Signs^? Program uses American Sign Language (ASL)

Since the publication of the our book, many people have asked us how using the Baby Signs^? Program relates to American Sign Language, the official language of the Deaf community. The simple answer is that the Baby Signs^? Program incorporates the most useful, "baby friendly" signs from American Sign Language and combines them with signs that babies and parents have created themselves and found particularly useful. link here ---> click me!

The Baby Signs Program developed this book Baby Signs: How to talk with your baby before your baby can talk---> click me!

"Some parents insist on teaching their babies authentic ASL signs, shunning . . . nonstandard signs; others don't consider the distinction important. Some are using the signs only as a temporary bridge to speech; others want their children to become bilingual. Personal preference plays a major role. . . . Babies are [just] delighted to be able to share their feelings, desires, questions and curiosity with others, knowing that others understand them."

-Matthew Moore
Editor, Deaf Life Magazine
March 2007

(NOTE: The picture (right) has a link...but I haven't checked it out)

dNoodle · May 2011

jaciandseth:
I plan to use a few basic signs. To the PP who was worried about babysitters, etc. not understanding the signs, they're very basic. A 2 minute tutorial would be enough for an adult to learn them.
Personally, I'm not planning on using DVDs or TV to teach my LO the signs. You can go to this website, https://www.signingsavvy.com/, and see 5 ASL words per day. I'm learning the signs I want LO to know and will teach new words to her when she gets the first few down.
As far as the whole language development debate, the only way baby sign language would delay speech is if the baby was planted in front of the TV to watch the DVDs and hardly ever talked to. DH and I want our LO to know simple sign language and basic Spanish. To teach her, we'll be interacting with her. A neighbor of mine uses the DVDs and the baby will repeat the sign and then stare at him to do it too. I personally think interaction is the most important element of language development, whether it be verbal or visual.

For the record, I watch the DVDs by myself and then use the signs with DS in conversation.

Want a personalized experience?

Do you plan on teaching LO sign language?

Re: Do you plan on teaching LO sign language?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards