In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Language Myths in Interpreted Education: First Language, Second Language, What Language? Christine Monikowski Our system has no way to judge whether deaf students in the educational mainstream are afforded an equal education. Between 46,000 and 51,000 deaf and hard of hearing children are in the U.S. public schools at the elementary and secondary level (Allen et al. 1994). During the 1998–99 school year, approximately 59 percent of children with “hearing impairments” in the United States spent more than 40 percent of the day in a regular education classroom; this number increased from approximately 48 percent in 1988–89 (U.S. DOE and NCES 2002). Records show that “most deaf children are now enrolled in regular public elementary schools and receive instruction in English through a sign language interpreter . . . [and] secondary level mainstreamed students use educational interpreters in over half of their classes” (La Bue 1998, 4, 5). Records show that the academic achievement scores of deaf children have not improved much since the early 1900s (Quigley and Paul 1986) when residential schools were the only option.1 The average deaf student reads at a third to fourth grade level (Schildroth and Hotto 1994, 20). Records show that there are more academic programs for the training of interpreters than ever before (American Annals 2003, 165–70), yet estimates also suggest that the majority of interpreters working in the public schools today are not certified by the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, Inc. (RID).2 However, despite all this information that our records show, our system has no way to determine whether the education of deaf children in the interpreted mainstream is equal to that of their hearing counterparts in the same setting, although many have asked that question since the onset of P. L. 94-142 in 1975.3 The success or failure of a deaf child hinges on his or her language proficiency, which, in mainstreaming, most often means English proficiency. For a child whose primary method of communication is visual and manual, proficiency in English can be an unattainable goal (despite La Bue’s research, above, that tells us the majority of deaf children in public schools receive instruction in English through interpreters). If, indeed, the interpreter is producing English, the deaf student does not have the necessary English skills and, therefore, cannot comprehend the 48 interpreter’s message. Before an “equal education” can be determined, the deaf child’s first language (L1) must be identified, a difficult task at best. The educational challenge of teaching children who have not acquired a first language is complex. In traditional educational settings, teachers of the deaf, who are most often hearing, are expected to use spoken English along with a signing system derived from English. Yet, most of their students have not yet acquired a fundamental understanding of any natural language. (La Bue 1998, 6) This educational setting does not afford a deaf student the opportunity to acquire language, and the purpose of placing an interpreter in the classroom should not be to teach that first language. This chapter first focuses on the individuality of every deaf child and how that individuality affects his or her L1 acquisition. Then, a theory of L1 acquisition is presented with a discussion of the important role that a strong L1 foundation plays in L2 proficiency. The dynamics of a hearing classroom is reviewed and, specifically, the deaf student’s role as a participant in that classroom. Finally, the chapter examines the fictitious, assumed, naïve, and mythical role of interpreter as language model. THE PARTICIPANTS Let us consider two important participants in the educational setting, the deaf student and the interpreter, and the language they use in this setting. It would be helpful if we knew the student’s primary channel for successful communication. And, it would be helpful to consider what language the interpreter most often uses when interacting with the deaf child in the classroom. What Is This Deaf Child’s L1? “As children communicate with those around them, processes of language acquisition unfold, and children come to understand and participate in the social world they inhabit with others” (Ramsey 1997, 6). If the deaf child has Deaf4 parents who use a visual language such as American Sign Language (ASL) in the United States or Langue des Signes Québécoise (LSQ) in Quebec, the child’s L1 is acquired in this natural and spontaneous manner, just as a...

Share