Friday, 13 May 2011

Deaf Education

    Having a hearing person talk about Deaf education seems to be a contradiction in terms, but it’s a subject that interests me as an “outsider” and so I hope you’ll forgive me taking an interest in it.

    I was surprised to learn that there are no Deaf schools in Wales and only two in Scotland – and England doesn’t fare better, with less than schools remaining. Talking to Paul, my teacher, he told us how Deaf schools were rapidly closing down and how specialist Deaf education was slowly disappearing.

    The nine remaining English Deaf schools that he knew of were;

  • The Royal School for the Deaf, Derby (BSL & English)
  • Royal School for Deaf Children, Margate (BSL, SSE, English & Oral)
  • Frank Barnes School for Deaf Children, Camden (BSL & English)
  • Oak Lodge School, Wandsworth (BSL, SSE & English)
  • Hamilton Lodge, Brighton (BSL & English)
  • The Royal School for the Deaf, Manchester (Person-Centred)
  • Royal Academy for Deaf Education, Exeter (BSL & English)
  • St John’s School for the Deaf, Leeds (Oral)
  • Berkshire - Mary Hare (Oral)
    Having spent a very instructive few hours looking through their websites, it’s interesting picking up their common – and different – values. Obviously, all of them are committed to giving Deaf children the best start possible, but their approaches can different. As you can see from the above list, although many deal with their students in BSL, a variant such as SSE or a combination of sign and English is often used. Two, however, deal almost exclusively with oral-based education.

    From what I’ve learnt so far (and I’m still fairly new to Deaf culture), some people in the Deaf Community see this as quite a controversial approach; sign language forms a big part of their culture, and to see Deaf children missing out on that cultural experience causes a lot of anger in certain quarters.

    We asked whether Deaf children might fare better in mainstream schools, and Paul told us about the hesitation even with that amongst some Deaf people; they see, often through personal experience, the isolation that Deaf children can experience if they’re the only Deaf person in a room – or a school – full of hearing people.

    I think it can often depend on the support that Deaf children would get from the mainstream school as well; some schools have excellent SEN facilities that can really make sure all children are integrated and confident, but this is comparatively hit and miss. It can really depend on the area that families live in, and I fail to see how such an approach can improve the quality of educational care to children at all. To rely on a “postcode lottery” doesn’t seem like a fair system, regardless of your level of hearing.

    As I said to a (hearing) friend recently who’s learning BSL with me, I don’t know if I feel qualified to speak intelligently about this debate. I'm not Deaf, merely fascinated by the language and the culture. I remember what it was to feel isolated at school, but for different reasons – my dyspraxia, in its own way, marked me out as different. Would I have been happier going to a school that focused entirely on dyspraxic students? Probably not – although being the only dyspraxic student in the school, I know I would have benefited from meeting people who had the same condition (and felt the same way) as me.

    With the Deaf community, there’s a very proud culture that can come with knowing the language – and to be educated entirely orally, either in mainstream or specialist schooling, would potentially remove, or at the very least alter, a big part of that culture.

    Is there an easy answer? Given that this question has been debated by people who are far more expert in the subject than me, I suspect not. I’ve encountered opinions from both sides of the debate; some people are comfortable with the idea of Deaf education in mainstream schools, as long as there’s a solid SEN presence, but others are passionate about specialist Deaf education, and see the decline in specialist Deaf schools as representing a decline in BSL knowledge.

    I’m floating this question because I’m interested in understanding the subject better. I know that there are a lot of people who feel very passionate about this and I hope people can give me their thoughts.

5 comments:

  1. I went to Thomasson from 3-11 years. I started nursery with a severe language delay, I could barely say a sentence. I was diagnosed with severe-profound hearing loss at 9 months so was pre-lingually deafened(deaf before learning to talk), if it wasn't for Thomasson I wouldnt be where I am today. I did mainstream at the local school, for many lessons, including English with only a FM system and I did well. I then went onto secondary school and mainstreamed in all classes with a CSW.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Growing up completely oral, by eight yrs I had a receptive and expressive language of a 9 1/2 year old.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Did you grow up learning BSL at the same time, or did that occur later?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Well, i sort of picked up SSE along the way, although I never really used it myself. It was more of me using it with deaf SSE/BSL friends

    ReplyDelete
  5. When I was in high school, the languages taught were Spanish, German and French. We were required to study and learn Latin. I really think signed language (ASL for me) should be taught to everyone. Even hearing people can see at times what an asset it is to not have to speak with your voice. Oralism and speech reading for me is vital, I feel if more knew a signed language some awareness would naturally come with it.

    My biggest pet peeve (today) is the comment "Oh you are deaf, you will have to teach me to sign". It would seem that if you are deaf its a given that you will be a teacher of sign at some point. If I had a dollar everytime someone told me they were goign to learn sign, I would be a very rich girl and there would be a vast amount of people with a good understanding of ASL.

    ReplyDelete