ASL : Access , Benefits , and Quality
Rosen
being employed in deaf schools along with hearing teachers who sign , which helps provide strong language modeling for ASL acquisition .
When looking back at the history of deaf education , oralism can be viewed as a poorly conceived idea . In the past , many educators tried to make deaf children become speakers , while modern educators have a somewhat different view . However , the same underlying notion persists with the push towards promoting integration in the education system . Once again , educators are placing deaf children in a school environment with speakers . The assimilationist attitudes prevalent in special education are not sensitive to deaf students ’ differential needs . The American deaf community has protested over the integration practices as described , but they were shunned and put aside ( Van Cleve , 1993 ). While special education is known for trying to address the needs of children with disabilities , it has to be done in a real and meaningful way . Signing and sign language are a serious business , greatly affecting the education of deaf students , especially in relation to linguistic accessibility ( S . Supalla & J . H . Cripps , 2008 ).
When denied access to ASL , deaf children have experienced chronic underachievement in cognitive and literacy skills . This includes deprivation of linguistic and cognitive resources when these children do not have an opportunity for immersion in sign language ( Schick et al ., 2007 ; cf . Humphries et al ., 2012 ). Deaf children with hearing parents are at risk . Being enrolled in a speaking school clearly will not help with this situation . The impact of language delay is particularly acute in the area of theory-of-mind abilities ( Schick et al ., 2007 ).
Schools for the deaf have a long way to go in terms of provisions for strong programming for deaf children . Unfortunately , a connection between ASL and English has not yet been pursued in a systematic way in any school for the deaf . Those with cochlear implants will need to be part of the same programming as they continue to be deaf and must participate in an education approach that works for them . Such reasoning is based on the understanding that deaf children with implants experience reading difficulties , and their reading performance worsens as they get older ( Marschark , Sarchet , Rhoten , & Zupen , 2010 ).
A most fundamental need for deaf children is to have a legal mandate that will mandate their access to a well-established sign language such as ASL . The Education of the Deaf Act ( EDA ) enacted at the federal level does not include this mandate ( S . Supalla , 1994 ). A significant amount of work will need to be done to improve this legislation as a part of The Higher Education Opportunity Act in 2008 . Amending EDA is not a new idea as it has already undergone changes through the years as did IDEA . IDEA is designed for students with disabilities , whereas EDA is specifically for deaf children . The changes to EDA will align it to IDEA so that the two pieces of legislation will complement each other . Some new key provisions to EDA would require schools for the deaf to have highly qualified teachers from Pre-K through 12th grade . These schools will need to have a strong program for making sure that hearing parents who have deaf children are supported in their learning and use of ASL at home .
A more effective integration model could be pursued through EDA , which would encourage hearing siblings of deaf children and others who know ASL to enroll in a school for the deaf . This “ reverse integration ” is already taking place in a number of charter schools nationwide ( Leigh , Andrews , & Harris , 2017 ). This innovative integration approach , among other practices , could help boost the status of schools for the deaf in the eyes of society . The reform as described here calls for re-inventing deaf education and turning it into a form of sign language education ( J . H . Cripps & S . Supalla , 2012 ; Padden & Rayman , 2002 ). The new model would be more in tune with what is understood about linguistic accessibility and how to best teach deaf children .
SASLJ , Vol . 1 , No . 1 – Fall / Winter 2017 19