Educating Deaf Students: Global Perspectives

Co-Enrollment: An Effective Answer to the Mainstream Debacle

Co-Enrollment An Effective Answer to the Mainstream Debacle CARL J. KIRCHNER
Students, parents, teachers, and administrators in 22 co-enrollment classroom sites have witnessed the shattering of “the plate glass curtain of deafness ” (Golladay, 1991) over the past 16 years. This shattering has moved the educational challenges and opportunities for deaf and hard of hearing students from the confining self-contained classroom and/or the nondirect (i.e., with interpreter) mainstream classroom to the head of the class with educational environments that tap the best of both. Mainstreaming: The Definition The basic concept of mainstreaming/inclusion/integration in the United States is derived from the notion of Least Restrictive Environment, which the U.S. Federal Government implemented through legislation in 1975. There have been a number of definitions over the years, but basically mainstreaming /inclusion/integration is the placement of a deaf or hard of hearing student in the regular classroom, with or without a peer group, utilizing a variety of support services as needed (Kirchner, 1995). In most cases, for deaf and hard of hearing students, an interpreter is used to bridge the communication gap in hearing-speaking classrooms. Regular classroom placement may be for a full or partial day based on the identified student’s needs. Mainstreaming: The Background When PL 94-142 (Education of All Handicapped Children Act) became law in the United States more than 25 years ago, concerns were raised over the possible impact it would have on the quality of education and the delivery of services for deaf and hard of hearing students. In retrospect, the issues raised 161 were only the tip of the mainstream iceberg as educators, administrators, parents , and students struggled to maintain some semblance of best practices needed for achieving academic success in the 21st century. Mainstreaming: The Results For so many deaf and hard of hearing students, mainstreaming turns out to be more isolating than what was expected in the notion of Least Restrictive Environment. Often the anticipated social results, both personally and in terms of peer interaction, are never achieved. Classroom instruction/participation often happens via a third party (an interpreter), which is not a tenet of good pedagogical practice. The support person assigned to work with the student often becomes the handler of the student’s affairs—limiting his or her growth and development. No peer group is formed, and there is no real peer group involvement. The regular classroom teacher feels imposed upon because there is no mentorship or support for the teacher or the student . Academic results are often minimal as the student is frequently given his or her own work, which is either “dumbed down” or has no relevance to current class work (Antia, 1998). The theory and practice of what have been labeled as integration, mainstreaming , or inclusion have not resolved the difficulty of placing deaf and hard of hearing students within the regular classroom using the support services of interpreters, speech/language specialists, and other specialist support personnel. Fragmentation, not only of services (no one knows who is in charge), but also of the pipeline for direct access to learning, is in stark contrast to time-proven pedagogical parameters of direct communication access to information, peer group involvement (social and intellectual), and curriculum consistency. Each of these parameters is compromised when deaf and hard of hearing students are placed in the regular classroom environment without addressing the underlying educational issue—the need to effectively change the learning environment without changing the curriculum content. Co-Enrollment: The Background The option of co-enrollment was developed to • Eliminate the in/out “one, two, or more periods” mainstreaming with an interpreter or teacher—an approach that does not allow for the development of peer relationships or student classroom “ownership.” 162 Carl J. Kirchner • Remove the need for an interpreter in the classroom in order to maintain the cardinal rule of sound educational pedagogy of direct communication between teacher and student. • Create an educational environment that does not have a dual set of curriculum standards—one for deaf and hard of hearing students and one for hearing students. • Erase the perceived notion that deaf and hard of hearing students are not academically capable—that is, everyone is placed in the class on an equal basis (Kirchner, 1994). Co-Enrollment: The Definition Co-enrollment is the placement of deaf and hard of hearing and hearing students in a general education classroom utilizing the school...