User talk:Jessblank/sandbox

Peer Review

The layout is very nicely organized and easy to follow; I really liked that. There is a large amount of useful information here, but there are some parts where citations are still missing, specifically in the Contributing Factors section. It is a draft though, so I recognize that adding citations is probably something you plan on doing later on after more concrete information is added.

One thing I noticed is that a lot of the information seems tied to ASL/English and the US, but the article doesn't specify that the focus is in the US. I'm not sure whether the article is meant to be US-specific, but if not, it could be helpful to include information about how this is materialized elsewhere. The specific section that comes to mind for this is Contributing Factors and Efforts to Remediate.

Regarding the Spoken Language vs. Sign Language section, I know it's in the form of bullets/an outline right now, but for when you put it into paragraphs, I think it would be helpful to sort of consolidate the arguments for each in their own paragraphs to make it easier for readers to draw their own comparisons and contrasts. If you presented the arguments for one side first and then the arguments for the other, I think it would flow nicely.

For the section on educational placements, it would be helpful to include information about how the different placements have been evaluated in terms of their impact on language deprivation. That research or source material may not be widely available, but if it's accessible, it would definitely add to the information you already have there.

Overall, the article is certainly a strong start. The information currently there is clearly presented, well organized, and easy to understand. I look forward to seeing the finished product. Geo.grail (talk) 03:21, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi

So, I think your article is very nice and you have a lot of information on the page. So I have a few comments about some information that could possibly help.

The lead section will most likely need a citation to support the paragraph. In this first paragraph an error that I found in the sentence, “Similar results can be more frequently (remove “be”) seen in Deaf and Hard of Hearing children.” Also, I am not sure if you plan to move it but the link right under your lead section could possibly be better at the bottom under resources.

       Under the “Lack of Awareness” topic, maybe the first point and the bullet right under it can be combined into one sentence. For example, “At least 90% of Deaf and Hard of Hearing children are born to hearing parents, who are unfamiliar with deafness.” Also, I found a citation if you want to use it. It is a book named “Introduction to American Deaf Culture” It explains the 90% Formula in chapter 3. It also has other citations available for you to use. 

       Under your topic “Educational Placement that may not be conducive to their unique need” the second bullet point makes a statement, These approaches often assume that English is their L1 (First language) and that these L1 foundations in English are already strong, having been set from birth to age 5.” Just be careful with the phrasing of the sentence because you state that the approaches often assume and that could be tricky. That sentence should possibly be rephrased in a different light and supported with a citation. 

       Under the “Early language is key” topic a possible rephrasing of the first sentence, from “Children normally will be exposed to language at a young age.”  to “Normally, children will be exposed to language at a young age.” After that under the “Educational placement is important” topic, the four placements are lined with bullet points and could possibly be numbered instead. 

       On your last topic “LEAD-K”, It give good information but could possibly be better written in paragraph format instead of bullet points.

       A few other things about the article is that some of the important words could be linked to other pages that explain what they are, for example, “Bilingual” could be linked to another page that speaks on what is the meaning of Bilingual. The last thing is that you should be careful with how long some of your titles are. Some are a little long. Overall nice job. Bre'miller (talk) 04:33, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

The article is well organized and easy to follow. The first thing I noticed were some of the titles seemed unnecessarily lengthy. For example, "Early language is key" could be reduced to "Age of Exposure" and "Educational placement is important" to "Educational Placement" and the conclusions drawn in these titles could be implicated in the portion below. Aside from rethinking some of the headers, I would say you have a variety of sources and a good amount of information to start working these ideas into full paragraphs. I'm excited to see how it turns out! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zmsc42 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 20 March 2017 (UTC)