Reflections on Bilingual, Bicultural Education for Deaf Children: Some Concerns About Current Advocacy and Trends

Reflections on Bilingual, Bicultural Education for Deaf Children Some Concerns About Current Advocacy and Trends E. Ross Stuckless Not long ago, I had the opportunity to participate in a meeting of the Ontario Educators of the Hearing Impaired in Milton, Ontario, which is a short distance from Toronto. A major topic of discussion at that meeting was the bilingual, bicultural education of deaf children. This is a topic to which I had previously given only casual attention through reading a few things here and there, but nevertheless, I was invited to share my thoughts with several of my colleagues at the meeting. Needless to say, my discussion was short on substance. Since then, I have read considerably more material on the subject, the preponderance of which expresses strong advocacy. I've talked with numerous people on both sides of the issue—and indeed it is an issue—visited a bilingual, bicultural program, and taken some time to organize my thoughts and opinions. With the reader's indulgence, I'd like to share some reflections as briefly as I can and without resorting to research citations. First, let me say that I have always supported the use of signs with most deaf children, both at home and in school. I have a younger deaf brother, and signing had an important place in our family. Our parents saw to it that my brother, David, had deaf role models and that he was introduced to deaf culture long before those terms appeared in print. Our parents did this largely by intuition; neither of them ever went to high school, and what Dr. Stuckless is a professor at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York. counseling they received from educators sometimes ran counter to what they elected to do as David's parents. To this day, I have high regard for the intuitions and guardianship of most parents concerning the welfare of their deaf children. Let me add, however, that I also strongly support the development of English language skills among all deaf children in English-speaking communities, and where feasible, the development of their ability to make practical use of spoken language both expressively and receptively. And I have respect for individual differences among deaf children and adults, including their personal choices of cultural identity and their selection of particular communication styles. That just about sums up my credo as an educator of deaf students. The only point I would add is the importance of education in attaining competitive and satisfying work. Nevertheless, as an educator, when I express these beliefs on the topic of bilingual, bicultural education for deaf children as currenüy being advocated, I begin to feel uneasy. A driving force behind the present movement is empowerment and the quest for full enfranchisement and self-determination for deaf people. This is a sociopolitical goal. Whereas sociopolitical and educational goals may each be worthy and defensible in their own rights, they are not always compatible, particularly within the context of public education. I am concerned that some of the practices being advocated and implemented under the aegis of bilingual, bicultural education may be placing many deaf children at risk, at least from an educational perspective. I am con270 AAD Vol. 136, No. 3 Reflections on Bilingual, Bicultural Education for Deaf Children cerned also that many families of deaf children may experience pressure to make extraordinary adaptations that are detrimental to the family as a whole. Having said that, let me now turn to three particular points of concern. One. Within the framework of bilingual education, American Sign Language (ASL) is being advocated as the deaf child's native or first language. Because of the distinctive structures of English and ASL, they cannot be transmitted simultaneously by the same person (unlike with English and a variety of manually coded English systems). By definition, the use of ASL precludes use of the voice. As a consequence, either de facto or by intent and policy, bilingual education efforts discourage the use of voice and spoken language on the part of the deaf child and others in his or her environment, including the teacher and the...