Deaf Learners: Development in Curriculum and Instruction

Preface

ix Preface T HE ORIGINAL IMPETUS for this book came from a PhD level course in curriculum and instruction for deaf learners that we co-taught. Each of us had taught undergraduate and graduate curriculum courses in general education, special education, and education of deaf learners, and we were aware of the ongoing confluence of education of deaf students with general education, along with the attendant challenges. The career goals of the students in the class primarily were to become college and university professors participating in research and preparing undergraduate and graduate students to be involved professionally with deaf learners. We were all aware that the requisite sets of knowledge and skills for teachers of deaf students were changing rapidly and that traditional paradigms were not satisfactory. Educational placement patterns for deaf students have been evolving during the past two generations , from predominantly residential and separate day schools in large cities to public school settings that range from complete integration (immersion) to partial integration to separate classrooms in schools with a majority of hearing students. Concurrent with changes in placement, a variety of options in instructional modes of communication is now available, including oral-only instruction, English-based signing with or without speech, and American Sign Language. It is common now for deaf students to have a variety of educational placements and to be taught in different modes of instruction by the time they have completed their secondary education. This is a relatively new situation. The growing utilization of cochlear implants and increased sophistication of digital hearing aids has also presented new challenges and opportunities to educators. In addition to these realities, deaf students represent the same geographic and ethnic diversity as the general school-age population. Added to this are educationally relevant variables such as age and extent of hearing loss, quality of communication in the home, and possible existence of disabilities concomitant with the cause of deafness itself in a particular child, such as premature birth or meningitis. Traditionally, education of the deaf has been separate from general education and even what has been considered special education. The primary focus in many deaf education programs was the development of articulate speech and of English skills, predominantly through the spoken word but also to some extent through reading and writing. As we document in the opening chapters, the emphasis on preparing (predominantly) hearing teachers to concentrate on speech development resulted in neglect of traditional content areas such as math, science, social studies, and English. x฀ Preface The English or “language” instruction that deaf children received bore little resemblance to the general education curriculum. Rather, it was designed to teach deaf children the English skills that hearing children brought to the educational process. The field has been hampered by low expectations for students and inadequate training in subject matter for teachers. We are at a point in American education where a number of complex factors intersect. There is a movement to increase academic achievement by strengthening the curriculum, improving teacher training, providing parents with more options, and requiring annual statewide assessments of educational progress. This movement toward what might be considered educational excellence occurs at the same time that there is a trend toward equity of access, or inclusion, for all children in the process. Historically, American education has swung back and forth between the ideals of equality and the ideals of excellence. The present situation combines, perhaps for the first time, a commitment to strive for high levels of achievement for all children with a federal mandate for rigorous coursework. The goals of equity and excellence are not always compatible. In the case of deaf learners, beginning around 1975, access to the regular educational curriculum was emphasized. This has expanded in the present time to include demonstrated success in the regular curriculum, including, in most states, the same high-stakes testing necessary for promotion and high school graduation as is found for hearing students. Although we talk of the regular educational curriculum, it is evident that there is no one curriculum in the United States. Despite growing federal influence, American education remains primarily under state and local control. Curricula vary across and within states, and, to a large degree, reflect the constituencies that they serve. Although we are aware of this, we use the terms “regular” or “general” curriculum as a convenience. In this text we address common issues and realities that deaf children, their parents, and professionals serving them must face in improving educational...