Talk:Deafness in Benin

Language Emergence section

It's great to see this article taking shape! In the language emergence section, you should focus first on identifying the sign language(s) that is/are used in Benin. Then you can consider where they came from and what kind of sign languages they are (Deaf community sign language or shared signing community, or something else). Mentioning Andrew Foster might be relevant in that context (if indeed one or more current sign languages have been impacted by his work and legacy); I would not recommend going into as much detail about him as an individual - instead, just link to his wiki page.

Similarly, if one or more sign languages arose in the context of Deaf education, you can mention that here, but most of what you currently have might fit better under the section on primary & secondary education. In that section, you don't provide any citations until the very end of the paragraph. Every factual claim needs to have its own citation, even if that means citing the same source 3 sentences in a row. (Remember that someone else might come along and stick in a ton of new content between the beginning and the end of that paragraph.) Matthall.research (talk) 14:40, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I think you should mention what sign language(s) is used and where it originates from in this section. For example, in Ireland they use Irish Sign Language which is derived from French and American Sign Language. Also. I do not think you need so much information about Andrew Foster. I think some of your information in the introduction should actually be included in language emergence. Ashlynmccormick (talk) 21:20, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Initial graded feedback:

The feedback I'd want to provide has already been stated in my comments from October 4 and Ashlyn's review. If you'd like to strengthen this section, that will be where you should start.

Current score: 1/3 Matthall.research (talk) 21:43, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Final graded feedback:

The reorganized section is much improved! Score: 2.75 Matthall.research (talk) 23:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Deaf-led organizations section

First, remember to keep the wiki article fact-focused. Although your analysis makes good sense to me, it's an interpretation rather than a fact, at least as currently written. If an organization has made that link explicit, then say so (and cite!). For example, "Organization X is focused on combating discrimination against Deaf people by investing in Deaf education [citation]."

In this section (which you may still be development), I'd like to see names of specific organizations (and/or individuals). You may also find it difficult to determine whether organizations are in fact Deaf-led: in this case, you might be better served by changing the header to "Significant organizations" or something more neutral. Then, for each entry, you can indicate whether it is Deaf-led, hearing-led, or undetermined. Matthall.research (talk) 14:45, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

If I were you I would add more information about each organization such as who runs the programs and how they are funded. I think you should make a subsection for each organization. Also, I am I little confused by your two other sections. They are not listed as any of the 5 sections we talked about in class. I would review the assignment rubric. Ashlynmccormick (talk) 21:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

@Ashlynmccormick: Both of those other sections were part of a "Early Hearing Detection" section originally, until I (a Wikipedian not part of the class) decided they worked better as separate sections since the first one wasn't really related to early hearing detection. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Initial graded feedback:

-The first sentence in this section has two parts, but the link between them is unclear. Reference 6 supports the first clause, and the paragraph that follows supports the second. The "therefore" is where I'm not seeing evidence. Since this is an encyclopedia entry and not an essay, I recommend splitting these claims into separate declarative sentences.

-The content about ASUNOES and CAEIS is good. To make it great, see if you can figure out what organization represents Benin at the World Federation of the Deaf. If it's ASUNOES, say so. Because WFDeaf delegate organizations are already required to be Deaf-led, you would also be able to make an justified inference about the leadership of ASUNOES.

Current score: 2/3 Matthall.research (talk) 21:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Final graded feedback:

Much improved (although I still question the "therefore" in the first sentence)! Score: 2.75/3 Matthall.research (talk) 23:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Newborn and Infant Hearing Screening

Initial graded feedback:

-The current title may be too restrictive; if you're eventually able to find more information about early interventions (e.g. hearing technologies, access to sign languages), you may want to retitle it to "Early hearing detection & intervention".

-Does anything you've found justify inferences about the *absence* of newborn hearing screening elsewhere? It would help the reader to know whether this hospital is being singled out because it's the first, or the last, or what...

-Have you been able to determine anything about what happens when kids are identified as DHH? Right now, the section says nothing about the intervention side of things.

Current score: 1.75/3 Matthall.research (talk) 22:00, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Final graded feedback:

I appreciate the added acknowledgement that information on early intervention is scarce. I still don't know what the status of newborn hearing screening is beyond this one hospital.

Score: 2.25/3 Matthall.research (talk) 23:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Deaf Education sections

Graded feedback:

Primary & Secondary ed: Very nice information about the schools! I do wish there were more information about the broader state of deaf ed - for instance, do we have any idea how common it is for DHH people to attend school in the first place? Is there a tradition of mainstream education? That kind of info would have made this a 3. Score: 2.25/3

Higher Ed: Nice use of limited information. Information about the (un)availability of interpreting or other accommodations would have been welcome, but this is more than satisfactory. Score: 2.75/3 Matthall.research (talk) 23:05, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Healthcare

Graded feedback:

I'm not seeing support for the claim in the first sentence from the citation provided; perhaps you meant to cite Baratedi et al?

More generally, this section would benefit from an overt acknowledgement that the evidence comes from other sub-Saharan countries, and is being applied to Benin via inference.

Score: 2/3 Matthall.research (talk) 23:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Human/Civil Rights section

Graded feedback:

I love everything that's here! I'm particularly impressed by the documentation of cultural views: that's often difficult to cite, and you've done that well. I just wish you'd done more with the information available from the CRPD list of issues & state report.

Score: 2.5/3 Matthall.research (talk) 23:18, 29 November 2022 (UTC)