Opinion on Anne E. Geers’s Research

Okay, where do I start here? Please note that this is my opinion and over 70 million people in the Deaf community are welcome to share their opinion on this subject as well.

I strongly believe that the research done by Anne E. Geers may be biased or improperly researched. In her article, it stated that she studied a different three groups where one of them would have newborn to learn sign language early on, one with cochlear implantation while learning spoken language such as English and one with cochlear implantation learning sign language. In her research, she stated that the group where the newborn who had cochlear implanted and learnt spoken language could speak more clear and better reading than the other two groups. I must ask, did Anna E. Geers herself handpicked the sign language teacher to teach the child sign language? And what exactly did she mean “sign language”? Doesn’t she realize that all other sign language modes besides American Sign Language has proved to be fail and that American Sign Language has proved to be successful for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing child? Another question, wasn’t she aware of bilingual-bicultural education? The fact that American Sign Language is a visual language, a recognized language at that and it is vital that the Deaf children to learn early on in their toddler age to help the child to understand communication itself so that the child can effectively learn written English through bilingual-bicultural education (American Sign Language and English). So, her “research” on early sign language (what sign language?) exposure and cochlear implantation benefits is much as fail as any. Not only that, cochlear implants does not help anyone to understand word by word because all it does is it gives them a sound and all they are for is to help them to aware their surrounding but not what people says. Her research can do more harm to little human beings and cannot be used anywhere except it can be perceived as Anne E. Geer’s opinion only.