Deaf education

Deaf education is the education of students with any degree of hearing loss or deafness which addresses their differences and individual needs. This process involves individually-planned, systematically-monitored teaching methods, adaptive materials, accessible settings, and other interventions designed to help students achieve a higher level of self-sufficiency and success in the school and community than they would achieve with a typical classroom education. A number of countries focus on training teachers to teach deaf students with a variety of approaches and have organizations to aid deaf students.

This article is about the education of deaf students and educators of deaf students. For the study of deaf culture, arts, sign languages, and people, see Deaf studies. For Deaf schools, see Category:Schools for the deaf. For the English art rock/new wave band, see Deaf School.
Class for deaf students in Kayieye, Kenya

Identifying deaf students

Children may be identified as candidates for deaf education from their audiogram or medical history. Hearing loss is generally described as slight, mild, moderate, severe, or profound, depending upon how well a person can hear the intensities of frequencies.[1] Of the children identified as deaf, only 5% are born to deaf parents.[2] This percent of deaf students may have a linguistic advantage when entering the education system due to more extensive exposure to a first language.[3]

In cases of congenital hearing loss (hearing loss from birth), parents can start to notice differences in their children's hearing as soon as newborn to three months old. If a child doesn't respond to sudden loud sounds, this could be an indication. As the baby begins to age to around four to eight months, they should turn their head towards where the sound is coming from. Around a year to 16 months, if they don't pronounce words correctly, or don't speak at all, this could also be an indication.[4] All those are indications of congenital hearing loss, which means the child was born this way.

A child can also acquire hearing loss at a young age due to a middle ear infection, a serious head injury, exposure to loud noises over a long period, and many other causes. If this occurs, the same symptoms would occur as they do with congenital hearing loss. If this happens when a child is older, around toddler or preschool age, there are more signs to look for. Signs could include a child not replying when their name is called. The child may pronounce words differently than the rest of their peers. If the child turns up the TV incredibly high or sits very close, this could also be an indication. One of the biggest indications that a child may have hearing loss is they intensely focus on the person's lips and facial expressions to understand what they are saying when they are having a conversation with someone.[5] If a child has these signs, getting a screening for hearing loss would be the next step.

In as recent years as the 1990s, many parents in the United States were unaware that their child was deaf until on average 2.5 to 3 years old, according to the U.S. National Institute of Health.[6] Worse yet, many other children were not identified as having any hearing impairment until they reached 5 or 6 years of age. In 1993, the National Institutes of Health’s Consensus Development Conference on Early Identification of Hearing Loss concluded previous risk-based assessment was not sufficient and that all infants should receive hearing screenings, ideally prior to hospital discharge postpartum.[7] At the time of this decision, only 11 hospitals nationally were performing screening on 90 percent of babies born, according to the National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management.[7] Since then, universal hearing screening has greatly improved early identification.[6]

Language deprivation is defined as lack of access to language during a child’s critical period for language exposure, which begins to taper off precisely around the age of five.[8] Unlike any other population, the vast majority of Deaf and hard of hearing children are at risk of having this type of limited exposure to language in early childhood. Research on language deprivation and early childhood interventions to prevent language deprivation are burgeoning. Language Equality & Acquisition for Deaf Kids (LEAD-K),[9] for example, is a national campaign that aims to ensure that D/HH children in the United States gain the early language foundation necessary to be kindergarten-ready.

For D/HH adolescents and adults who have passed the critical period for language acquisition and have experienced language deprivation, the consequences are far-reaching. Delayed age of acquisition of a first language has deleterious effects on all levels of language processing, ranging from syntactic, to lexical, to phonological difficulties,[10] not to mention cognitive delays, mental health difficulties, lower quality of life, higher trauma, and limited health literacy.[8] Additionally, delayed exposure to a fully accessible language (i.e. a natural sign language) in early life not only affects the ability to acquire such a sign language later in life, but "leads to incomplete acquisition of all subsequently learned languages".[10] The impact of language deprivation is severe and must be considered in efforts toward early identification of deaf and hard of hearing children as well as intervention.

Individual needs

Deaf education programs must be customized to each student's needs, and deaf educators provide a continuum of services to deaf students based on individual needs.[11] For instance, if a student is in a regular class, a note taker or interpreter might be an accommodation provided in their education plan.[12] In the United States, Canada and the UK, education professionals use the acronym IEP when referring to a student’s individualized education plan.

Educational philosophies

There are a variety of educational philosophies that differ in their views both regarding language use and goals for deaf and hard-of-hearing students.

Bilingual-bicultural education
Main article: Bilingual-bicultural education
Alumni Hall, the middle and high schools at the Indiana School for the Deaf (a bilingual-bicultural school)

(Variations: bilingual education, dual language) In this philosophy, deafness is approached as a cultural, not a medical, issue (see models of deafness).[13] In a bilingual-bicultural program, deaf children learn sign language such as American Sign Language (ASL) as a first language, followed by a written or spoken language such as English as a second language.[13][14] Bilingual-bicultural programs consider spoken or written language and sign language equal languages, helping children develop age-appropriate fluency in both.[14] The bilingual-bicultural philosophy states that since deaf children learn visually, rather than by ear,[13] education should be conducted in a visual language. To promote students' accuracy and fluency in either language, sign language and spoken language are not used simultaneously, because natural sign languages, such as American Sign Language (ASL), possess their own phonological system (with visual phonemes),[15] morphology,[16] and syntactic structure[17] that differs greatly from that of spoken languages. In addition to bilingualism, this philosophy also emphasizes mastery of two cultures, both Deaf culture and hearing culture.

Proponents of this philosophy emphasize the need for deaf and hard-of-hearing students to have exposure to a fully accessible language (i.e. a sign language) from a young age for optimal cognitive development.[8] Supporters believe that, due to the widely recognized variability in cochlear implant and hearing aid outcomes,[18][19] sign language access is critical to ensure that deaf and hard-of-hearing children do not experience language deprivation, which has significant effects on mental health, socioemotional development, language fluency, and educational outcomes, among other factors.[8]

Critics of this philosophy believe that without a strong emphasis on spoken communication, this philosophy may lead to students being unable to integrate into the typically-hearing world.[20]

Auditory-oral and auditory-verbal education
Main articles: Auditory-verbal therapy and Oralism

In this philosophy, deafness is approached as a medical, not a cultural, issue (see models of deafness). There are two main educational philosophies for deaf and hard-of-hearing students based on an emphasis on auditory and verbal skills. The names of these philosophies are sometimes used interchangeably, but the methods primarily used in each philosophy are distinct.

Oralism

Oralism is a philosophy that the education of deaf students should be conducted through and should promote the use of spoken language. This philosophy utilizes a variety of approaches, including lip reading and speech training. Oralism was popularized in the late 1800s and largely enforced throughout Europe and North America, following the Second International Congress on Education of the Deaf in 1880. Oralism was established as an alternative to manual (sign language) education and stands in opposition to the use of sign language in the education of deaf and hard of hearing students.

Total Communication

Total Communication is an educational philosophy for deaf and hard of hearing students which encourages the use and combination of a variety of communication means, including listening, lipreading, speech, formal sign languages, artificial sign systems (or manually coded language), gestures, fingerspelling, and body language.[21] The goal of the Total Communication philosophy is to optimize communication skills using a combination of means that are most effective for each individual child, leading to implementations of this philosophy that greatly differ from one to the next.

Whereas the Bilingual-Bicultural philosophy emphasizes the separation of spoken and signed languages, the Total Communication philosophy allows simultaneous use of signed and spoken languages. It also allows the use of artificial signed systems, which are based on the grammar and syntax of spoken language and stand in opposition to formal sign languages, which have their own distinct grammar and syntactic rules.

Proponents of this philosophy believe that flexibility in communication strategies is critical for the success of deaf and hard of hearing children and that no one approach is effective for the majority of these children. Total Communication emphasizes taking the strengths and needs of individual children into account and believes that mixed communication strategies that cater to these strengths lead to optimal outcomes.[22]

Critics of this philosophy argue that using multiple modalities (sign language and/or sign systems alongside spoken language, also known as simultaneous communication) is problematic, because it reduces the linguistic quality of both languages[23] and therefore does not constitute full language exposure for deaf and hard-of-hearing children.

Educational settings

Signing schools (Variation: Deaf institute, State School for the Deaf, manual school)
Main article: Manualism

Students are taught through sign language, and instruction is designed to allow children to develop age-appropriate fluency in two languages: a signed language and a written language. Many bilingual-bicultural schools have dormitories; students may commute to school or stay in a dormitory as part of a residential program (see boarding school), visiting their families on weekends, holidays, and school vacations. Additional supports include speech-language pathology (SLP) services and assistive listening devices (ALDs) such as hearing aids and Cochlear implants.

Signing schools often adopt a Bilingual-Bicultural philosophy in which mastery of both a signed and a written language are equally prioritized, with supports provided for students who also wish to gain fluency in spoken language. Some signing schools utilize a Total Communication philosophy.

Examples of Bilingual-Bicultural K-12 programs in the United States include Texas School for the Deaf, California School for the Deaf, Fremont and The Learning Center for the Deaf. Bilingual-bicultural colleges and universities include Gallaudet University and National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID).

Hubbard Hall is the main building on the Northampton campus of Clarke Schools for Hearing and Speech, an oral school.

Oral schools

Students are taught through spoken language and instruction is designed to allow children to develop age-appropriate written and spoken fluency in the spoken language of their country. Deaf and hard-of-hearing students in such settings are taught to listen and talk through the use of assistive listening devices (ALDs) such as hearing aids, cochlear implants, or frequency modulation (FM) systems. Additional supports include lipreading and speech therapy.

Oral schools adhere to an auditory/verbal philosophy (either oralism or listening and spoken language) in which mastery of spoken language is prioritized.

Examples of auditory/verbal K-12 programs in the United States include Clarke Schools for Hearing and Speech, Cleary School for the Deaf, and Memphis Oral School for the Deaf.

Mainstream settings
Main article: Mainstreaming (education)

General education schools

Students are taught through spoken language in a public or private school where they join a class of predominantly (if not exclusively) typically-hearing peers. In this setting, deaf students can utilize a variety of supports including, but not limited to, sign language interpreters, amplification, assistive hearing technology (e.g., hearing aids, Cochlear implants), speech-to-text closed captioning, and note-taking services.

Self-contained classrooms

Students are taught in a self-contained classroom within a public or private general education school. Educational philosophies and languages of instruction vary by individual school and district. In self-contained classrooms, deaf and hard-of-hearing students may be placed exclusively with other deaf and hard-of-hearing peers or with other special education students.

Some deaf children exclusively attend a mainstream program; others join select mainstream classes for part of their day.[24] Students may receive accommodations, such as itinerant teachers, interpreters, assistive technology, note-takers and aides.[25][26]

Pros and cons of different education settings

Residential schools for the Deaf provide more opportunities for socialization and identification with the Deaf community and better access to school curriculum. Mainstreaming in general education settings provides students with the opportunity to socialize with their hearing peers and learn skills to adapt to environments dominated by hearing people.[27] Deaf advocate Ahmed Khalifa has shared how many people believe that general education settings better prepare Deaf students for the "real" or hearing world.[28]

Khalifa has expressed concerns about the standardization of curriculum in certain residential schools for the Deaf. [28] Deaf students often report learning more difficult material in general education settings than in residential schools for the Deaf, and they report better post-secondary educational and vocational opportunities.[29]

There is an increasing demand for Deaf students to be included in general education settings.[30] However, in general education settings, Deaf students tend to perform worse than their hearing peers academically due to miscommunications that occur through third-person Sign Language interpreting.[31] In addition to increasing miscommunication, third-person Sign Language interpreting in general education settings is economically inefficient and in some cases, is not possible due to a lack of school resources.[32] Deaf schools eliminate the need for third-person interpreting, and thus, reduce the probability of miscommunication between teachers and Deaf students.[28] Deaf schools also provide the opportunity for Deaf students to learn Sign Language, which can improve their scholastic and social-emotional capability.[32][33] Identification with the Deaf community and the ability to communicate with both hearing peers and Deaf peers positively predict self-esteem outcomes in Deaf students.[34]

History
Main article: History of institutions for deaf education

France

Charles-Michel de l'Épée pioneered deaf education in France. He did charitable work for the poor, and on one trip into the Paris slums saw two young, deaf sisters who communicated with a sign language. Épée then decided to dedicate himself to the education of the deaf, and founded a school in 1760. In line with the philosophy of the time (see French Enlightenment), Épée believed that deaf people were capable of language and developed a system of teaching French and religion. During the early 1760s his shelter became the Institut National de Jeunes Sourds de Paris, the world's first public school for deaf children.[35]

Great Britain

John Bulwer (1606-1656), an English physician, [36] wrote five works on bodily communication (particularly gestures). He was the first person in England to propose educating deaf people, [37] outlining plans for an academy in Philocophus and The Dumbe mans academie.

The grandson of Sir John Popham, Alexander, was born in 1650. He was either deaf at birth, or became so before acquiring speech. Two eminent men came to his home at Littlecote House to teach him to talk: John Wallis, mathematician and cryptographer, and William Holder, music theorist.[38]

The first British school for teaching the deaf to speak and read was Thomas Braidwood's Academy for the Deaf and Dumb in Edinburgh, established during the 1760s, the time of the Scottish Enlightenment. The school moved to London in 1783. Braidwood used an early form of sign language: the combined system, forerunner of British Sign Language. Under the management of Braidwood's nephew the school expanded, encouraging the establishment of an Institution for the Instruction of the Deaf and Dumb in Edgbaston in 1814 and others in Liverpool, Doncaster. Edinburgh, Exeter, and Manchester (the Manchester).

Britain's first free school for deaf pupils, the London Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb, was set up in 1792[39] by three men: Henry Thornton, MP, abolitionist, and reformer; Rev John Townsend (died 1826), educator and independent minister; and Henry Cox Mason, rector of Bermondsey.[40]

In his ministerial relation, Mr. Townsend became acquainted with a lady, whose son was deaf and dumb, and who had been a pupil of Mr. Braidwood’s almost ten years. The youth evinced an intellectual capacity which caused delight and surprise to the good pastor, who was astonished at the facility and accuracy, with which ideas were received and communicated. Mrs. C, the lady referred to, sympathising with those mothers whose circumstances precluded their incurring the expense of 1500 £, (which was the sum paid by herself,) pleaded the cause of those afflicted and destitute outcasts of society, until Mr. T. entered into her feelings of commiseration, and decided with her on the necessity and practicability of having a charitable Institution for the deaf and dumb children of the poor. (Memoirs p.37-8).[39]

Braidwood's nephew Joseph Watson offered himself as tutor, and eventually became headmaster;[41] he wrote On the Education of the Deaf and Dumb (1809). The institute's name and location changed more than once, and for most of the nineteenth century it occupied a purpose-built boarding school on the Old Kent Road, Southwark in Inner London;[42] it became The Royal School for Deaf Children Margate, which closed in 2015.[41]

The Elementary Education (Blind and Deaf Children) Act of 1893 set the compulsory age for the admission of deaf children in boarding schools at seven years, and the leaving age at sixteen. [43]This was at odds with the compulsory age of admission for hearing children, and blind children being five years old, and hearing children could leave at fourteen. In 1937, a new bill was passed by Parliament to lower the age of admission of children attending schools for the Deaf from seven years to five years.

In the mid-1960s the Inner London Education Authority set up two primary schools for deaf children, Frank Barnes School in North London and Grove House School in South London. They also opened Oak Lodge Secondary School in Wandsworth, South London, which was one of a few state boarding schools.[44]

British Sign Language was recognised in 2003.[45][46]

United States
Main article: History of deaf education in the United States

Deaf education in the United States began during the early 1800s, when the Cobbs School (an oral school) was established by William Bolling and John Braidwood and the Connecticut Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb (a manual school) was established by Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet and Laurent Clerc. When the Cobbs School closed in 1816, the manual method (which used American Sign Language) became common in deaf schools for most of the rest of the century. During the late 1800s schools began using the oral method, which only allowed the use of speech (in contrast to the manual method previously in place). The oral method was used for many years, until sign-language instruction gradually returned to deaf education.

Nigeria

Before the government stepped in, those with special needs were looked after by different religious or voluntary groups in the country, such as the School for the Blind of Gindiri and the Wesley School for the Deaf in Lagos. Public special education began to change in 1975 though. The National Policy on Education[47] recognized Special Education and was passed in 1977 and revised in 1981 and 2015.[48] The policy has a section devoted to special need education. The Blueprint on Education of the Handicapped in Nigeria started in 1989, which established several schools, like School for the Deaf Akure,[49] catering especially to those with special education needs. The 2006 national census puts the figure of persons with disability in Nigeria at 3,253,169, with about 39 per cent of school age.

Issues
See also: Manualism and Oralism

Two general methods of deaf education are manualism and oralism. Manualism is instruction using sign language, and oralism uses spoken language. Although controversy has existed since the early eighteenth century about which method is more effective, many deaf-educational facilities attempt to integrate both approaches. The National Association of the Deaf advocates a bilingual approach, to best support deaf students in their education.[50]

There are also disputes over which form of schooling is best for children who are deaf. Some say that mainstream schooling with other non-deaf students is the best because it prepares students for the real world where there is a mix of both hearing and deaf people. While others say that sending their child to a Deaf school is the better option because it surrounds their child with other students who are like them. Neither is better than the other and it is important to keep in mind that what is best for one child probably won't be the same for another. [28]

National approaches

United States
Main article: Deaf education in the United States

Some deaf students receive an individualized education program (IEP) outlining how the school will meet the student's individual needs. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that students with special needs be provided with Free Appropriate Public Education in the least restrictive environment appropriate to the student's needs. Government-run schools provide deaf education in varying degrees, from the least-restrictive setting (full inclusion) to the most restrictive (segregation in a deaf school).[51] Education offered by the school must be appropriate to the student's individual needs; however, schools are not required to maximize the student's potential or provide the best possible services. Like most developed countries, American schools are required to provide medical services (such as speech therapy) if the student needs those services. As technology improves, more solutions become available in classrooms. Things such as FM systems have been put into many schools. An FM system has two parts: the first is a microphone that the teacher wears around their neck while teaching. There are two ways the system is set up for the child. First, the FM radio waves can be directly set up with the child's hearing aid or cochlear implant, so the sound is amplified only to the particular child. The second is called a sound field. The sound field uses special speakers put strategically throughout the classroom. This increases sound to a whole classroom instead of just one student.[52]

Canada

Canada upholds and recognizes the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities stating that all Deaf people have the right to be educated in sign language. The Canadian Association of the Deaf's doctrine is the education of a child in a language that best fits them, and then the addition of a second language, like English or French, once a primary form of communication has been established.[53]

Nepal

Deaf children in Nepal have the right to free, qualified education in line with provisions of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). However, education in a school for the deaf is limited to 13 dedicated schools for the deaf and a slightly higher number of deaf resource classes in regular schools. All schools and classes are bilingual, with Nepali Sign Language and written Nepali the media of instruction.

Teacher training

Deaf education majors and degree programs offer training and certification in the education of students with a variety of hearing abilities, addressing students' individual differences and needs. Deaf education also includes the study of special education, Deaf studies, education, sign language and Deaf culture (not all programs include the latter two).

Canada

Ireland

United States

United Kingdom

New Zealand

The Netherlands

Deaf education associations
Philippines
Europe
United States
Canada
United Kingdom
  • British Association of Teachers of the Deaf (BATOD)[82]
  • British Deaf Association (BDA)[83]

See also

References
  1. "Disabilities - Center for Parent Information and Resources". nichcy.org.
  2. Brody, Jane E. (8 October 2018). "Unlocking the World of Sound for Deaf Children". The New York Times. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
  3. Mitchell, Ross E.; Karchmer, Michael A. (2004-02-03). "Chasing the Mythical Ten Percent: Parental Hearing Status of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in the United States". Sign Language Studies. 4 (2): 138–163. doi:10.1353/sls.2004.0005. ISSN 1533-6263.
  4. "hearing problems". Baby Center.
  5. "Hearing loss in children: Everything you need to know". Healthy Hearing. Retrieved 2018-04-29.
  6. "Yesterday, Today, & Tomorrow: NIH Research Timelines". U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
  7. "Newborn Hearing Screening". National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
  8. Hall, Wyatte (2017). "What You Don't Know Can Hurt You: The Risk of Language Deprivation by Impairing Sign Language Development in Deaf Children". Maternal and Child Health Journal. 21 (5): 961–965. doi:10.1007/s10995-017-2287-y. PMC 5392137. PMID 28185206.
  9. "About LEAD-K". LEAD-K: Language Equality and Acquisition for Deaf Kids. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
  10. Mayberry, Rachel (2007). "When timing is everything: Age of first-language acquisition effects on second-language learning". Applied Psycholinguistics. 28 (3): 537–549. doi:10.1017/S0142716407070294.
  11. Goodman, Libby (1990). Time and learning in the special education classroom. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. p. 122. ISBN 0-7914-0371-8. OCLC 20635959.
  12. Anderson, Karen (August 2012). "Accommodations for Students with Hearing Loss". Supporting Success for Children with Hearing Loss.
  13. Baker, Sharon; Baker, Keith (August 1997). "Educating Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: Bilingual-Bicultural Education. ERIC Digest #E553". Education Resources Information Center. ERIC Clearinghouse on Handicapped and Gifted Children. Retrieved 23 January 2011.
  14. Marschark, Marc; Lang, Harry G; Albertini, John A. (2002). Educating Deaf Students. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 145.
  15. Brentari, Diane (1998). A prosodic model of sign language phonology. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
  16. Aronoff, Mark; Meir, Irit; Sandler, Wendy (2005). "The paradox of sign language morphology". Language. 81 (2): 301–344. doi:10.1353/lan.2005.0043. PMC 3250214.
  17. Wilbur, Ronnie (1987). American Sign Language: linguistic and applied dimensions. Little, Brown and Co.
  18. Kral, Andrej; Kronenberger, William; Pisoni, David; O'Donoghue, Gerard (2016). "Neurocognitive factors in sensory restoration of early deafness: a connectome model". The Lancet Neurology. 15 (6): 610–621. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(16)00034-X. PMC 6260790. PMID 26976647.
  19. Geers, Ann; Mitchell, Christine; Warner-Czyz, Andrea; Wang, Nae-Yuh; Eisenberg, Laurie; et al. (CDaCI Investigative Team) (2017). "Early sign language exposure and cochlear implantation benefits". Pediatrics. 140 (1): e20163489. doi:10.1542/peds.2016-3489. PMC 5495521. PMID 28759398.
  20. Reagan, Timothy (1989). "Nineteenth-Century Conceptions of Deafness: Implications for Contemporary Educational Practice". Educational Theory. 39 (1): 39–46. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1989.00039.x.
  21. "Communication Considerations: Total Communication". Hands and Voices. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
  22. Greenberg, Mark; Calderon, Rosemary; Kusché, Carol (1984). "Early Intervention Using Simultaneous Communication with Deaf Infants: The Effect on Communication Development". Child Development. 55 (2): 607. doi:10.2307/1129972.
  23. Swisher, Virginia; Thompson, Marie (1985). "Mothers learning simultaneous communication: The dimensions of the task". American Annals of the Deaf. 130 (3): 212–217.
  24. Marschark, Marc; Lang, Harry G; Albertini, John A. (2002). Educating Deaf Students. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 143.
  25. Nowell, Richard; Innes, Joseph (August 1997). "Educating Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: Inclusion. ERIC Digest #E557". Education Resources Information Center. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. Retrieved 25 January 2011.
  26. "School Placement Considerations for Students Who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing". Hands and Voices. 2005. Retrieved 23 January 2011.
  27. Foster, Susan (1989-01-01). "Reflections of a Group of Deaf Adults on Their Experiences in Mainstream and Residential School Programs in the United States". Disability, Handicap & Society. 4 (1): 37–56. doi:10.1080/02674648966780031. ISSN 0267-4645.
  28. Khalifa, Ahmed (December 18, 2019). "Mainstream school vs. Deaf school: What are the respective pros and cons?". Hear Me Out!. Retrieved December 7, 2020.
  29. Angelides, Panayiotis; Aravi, Christiana (2006). "A Comparative Perspective on the Experiences of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals as Students at Mainstream and Special Schools". American Annals of the Deaf. 151 (5): 476–487. ISSN 0002-726X.
  30. Mitchell, R.E.; Karchmer, M.A. (2006). "Demographics of Deaf Education: More Students in More Places". American Annals for the Deaf. 151 (2): 95–104 – via JSTOR.
  31. Slobodzian, Jean T. (2011-07-01). "A cross‐cultural study: deaf students in a public mainstream school setting". International Journal of Inclusive Education. 15 (6): 649–666. doi:10.1080/13603110903289982. ISSN 1360-3116.
  32. National Association for the Deaf (2020). "Positions Statements on Schools for the Deaf". National Association for the Deaf. Retrieved December 7, 2020.
  33. Gallaudet University (2013). Critical Needs of Students Who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: A Public Input Summary (PDF). Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center. pp. 3–4.
  34. Jambor, E. & Elliot, M. (2005). "Self-esteem and Coping Strategies Among Deaf Students". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 10: 63–80 – via OXFORD Academic.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  35. "The national institute for the Deaf". Institut National de Jeunes Sourds de Paris. Retrieved March 30, 2014.
  36. Wollock, J (1996). John Bulwer and his Italian sources. In Mirko Tavoni (Ed.), Italia ed Europa nella linguisticadel Rinascimento, Atti del convegno internazionale, 20–24 March 1991, Ferrara, p.419
  37. Dekesel, K. (1992) John Bulwer: The founding father of BSL research, Signpost, Winter 1992 & Spring 1993 P11-14 & p36- 46
  38. "Find could end 350-year science dispute". BBC. 26 July 2008. Retrieved 5 May 2018.
  39. "Rev John Townsend (1757-1826), Founder of the London Asylum | UCL Ear Institute & Action on Hearing Loss Libraries". blogs.ucl.ac.uk. Retrieved 5 May 2018.
  40. "Dictionary of National Biography". Retrieved 5 May 2018 – via Wikisource.
  41. "Joseph Watson, Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb". www.ucl.ac.uk. Retrieved 5 May 2018.
  42. "London Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb | UCL Ear Institute & Action on Hearing Loss Libraries". blogs.ucl.ac.uk. Retrieved 5 May 2018.
  43. "Elementary Education (Blind and Deaf Children) Act 1893 - full text". www.educationengland.org.uk. Retrieved 2020-07-13.
  44. "AIM25 collection description". aim25.com. Retrieved 2019-02-16.
  45. "Official recognition of British Sign Language 1987-2003 – suggested reading | UCL UCL Ear Institute & Action on Hearing Loss Libraries". blogs.ucl.ac.uk. Retrieved 2020-11-15.
  46. "What is British Sign Language? - Information about BSL". British Sign Language - Learn BSL Online. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  47. https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/sites/planipolis/files/ressources/nigeria_special_needs_policy.pdf
  48. https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/sites/planipolis/files/ressources/nigeria_special_needs_policy.pdf
  49. https://www.businesslist.com.ng/company/189574/ondo-state-sch-for-the-deaf
  50. National Association of the Deaf, Dual Language Development and Use in the Educational Environment Position Statement Archived 2013-02-04 at the Wayback Machine
  51. Karen Zittleman; Sadker, David Miller (2006). Teachers, Schools and Society: A Brief Introduction to Education with Bind-in Online Learning Center Card with free Student Reader CD-ROM. McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages. pp. 48, 49, 108, G–12. ISBN 0-07-323007-3.
  52. Center, Gallaudet University and Clerc. "Assistive Technologies for Individuals Who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing". www3.gallaudet.edu. Retrieved 2018-04-29.
  53. "Canadian Association of the Deaf". Canadian Association of the Deaf - Association des Sourds du Canada. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  54. "American Sign Language and Deaf Studies Program C114". George Brown College. 2020-03-11. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  55. "Programs A-Z | NSCC". www.nscc.ca. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  56. "ASL and Deaf Studies - Overview :: Red River College Program & Course Catalogue". catalogue.rrc.ca. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  57. "Western Canadian Centre for Deaf Studies". www.ualberta.ca. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  58. "Deaf and Hard of Hearing – Job Readiness - Vancouver Community College". www.vcc.ca. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  59. "Deaf and Hard of Hearing Teacher Education Program". Faculty of Education. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  60. "Deaf Studies - School of Linguistic Speech and Communication Sciences - Trinity College Dublin". Trinity College Dublin.
  61. "Deaf Studies » Academics | Boston University". www.bu.edu. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  62. "Deaf Studies Major". www.gallaudet.edu. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  63. "Deaf Cultural Studies-American Sign Language Certificate". RIT. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  64. "Graduate Degree Programs". www.gallaudet.edu. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  65. "Academic Programs California State University, Northridge". CSUN.
  66. "British Sign Language & Deaf Studies, BA (Hons)". University of Central Lancashire. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  67. "Bristol University | Centre for Deaf Studies | Welcome to the Centre for Deaf Studies". Bris.ac.uk. Retrieved May 15, 2013.
  68. "The University of Edinburgh". The University of Edinburgh. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  69. "Search - University of Wolverhampton". www.wlv.ac.uk. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  70. "Study NZ Sign Language & Deaf Studies - Bachelor of Arts - AUT". www.aut.ac.nz. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  71. "Deaf Studies". Victoria University of Wellington. Retrieved March 30, 2014.
  72. Media, Eight. "Deaf Studies | Hogeschool Utrecht". www.internationalhu.com. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  73. "Careers & Education | Max Planck Institute". www.mpi.nl. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  74. "About Idea | IDEA Philippines". Retrieved 2020-12-12.
  75. "FEAPDA HOME". FEAPDA. Retrieved 2020-12-12.
  76. "Education". European Union of the Deaf. Retrieved 2020-12-12.
  77. "AG Bell > Home". www.agbell.org. Retrieved 2020-12-13.
  78. http://www.deafchildren.org/
  79. "Welcome to CEASD - CEASD". www.ceasd.org.
  80. "National Association of the Deaf - NAD". www.nad.org. Retrieved 2020-12-12.
  81. "National Deaf Education Conference". National Deaf Education Conference. Retrieved 2020-12-12.
  82. Simeon Rowsell. "Home - BATOD". BATOD. Retrieved 2020-12-12.
  83. "Home". British Deaf Association. Retrieved 2020-12-12.

Further reading
  • Edwards. R.A.R. Words Made Flesh: Nineteenth-Century Deaf Education and the Growth of Deaf Culture. New York: New York University Press, 2012. online review
  • Gannon, Jack R. Deaf Heritage: A Narrative History of Deaf America (2012)
  • Greenwald, Brian H., and John Vickrey Van Cleve. A Fair Chance in the Race of Life: The Role of Gallaudet University in Deaf History (2008)
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.