Agenda
 Discussion: Bonny!
 Theory: More thoughts on language and placement
options
 CI Corner
 Break
 Practice: Application of court cases and findings
 Housekeeping/Wrap up
Agenda
 Discussion: Bonny!
 Theory: More thoughts on language and placement
options
 CI Corner
 Break
 Practice: Application of court cases and findings
 Housekeeping/Wrap up
Discussion: Bonny!
A discussion board interlude
 “Deaf people successfully protested to finally have deaf
president at Gallaudet. Why aren’t we fighting to create a new
law to change the concept of IDEA/LRE into something that all
deaf students are highly encouraged to enter residential
program [where] all teachers must meet high standards of bi-bi
concepts and high standards of ASL abilities...”
 “What frustrates me is that this issue seems to be decided by
people who don't know anything about Deaf Education, or
really about individualized education in general. […] I think that
as future teachers in the field, it is our responsibility to try to
change the legislation. One point that really hit me hard was
this idea of providing an opportunity for education, not actually
providing education itself”
 Important points… what do you think?
One more discussion board point
 One of you wondered about the existence of statistics on
performance of mainstream versus residential Deaf students….
I found the following:
 Braden, Maller & Paquin, 2011 – The effects of residential versus
day placement on the performance IQs of children with hearing
impairment. Published in The Journal of Special Education
 They did IQ testing on Deaf children in both settings
 “[There were] statistically significant gains for commuters and
residents attending the residential program, in contrast to no PIQ
change for children attending the day program.”
 Residential school students increased IQ score 3-4 years after
placement
Agenda
 Discussion: Bonny!
 Theory: More thoughts on language and placement
options
 CI Corner
 Break
 Practice: Application of court cases and findings
 Housekeeping/Wrap up
Segregation
 Discourse analysis looks at how people use language,
included words and phrases, to cause people to think in a
certain way
 On the whiteboard is the term “segregation”
 When you are ready, come up and write down all the
associations that come to your mind with that word
 If someone has already written one of yours, feel free to
indicate that you agree
Segregation
 Proponents of full inclusion use the following three
arguments:
 All children learn best in the regular education classroom
 The goal of social equity is of greater importance than how
children learn
 Pull out programs violate children’s civil rights by
segregating them
 Why do you think they chose to use the word segregate?
 In trios, come up with at least one response against each
of the above statements related to Deaf children
LRE
 All this leads us to the “least restrictive environment,” and
its different interpretations (which we will talk about in
more detail next week)
 Often thought of as the “mainstream” classroom
 Self contained rooms and special schools thought of as more
restrictive environments
 Deaf education is a special case
 What do you think the implications are for Deaf children,
language development, and Deaf culture if the residential
school is thought of as a more restrictive environment?
Aspen School
 In groups of three, take a few minutes to discuss the
different interpretations of LRE in the Aspen school
 What did…
 The mainstreaming teachers think?
 The Deaf Education teachers think?
 The interpreters think?
 We will have a whole group discussion afterwards
Agenda
 Discussion: Bonny!
 Theory: More thoughts on language and placement
options
 CI Corner
 Break
 Practice: Application of court cases and findings
 Housekeeping/Wrap up
CI Corner
 A weekly discussion of an article either…
 About effectiveness (or lack thereof) of cochlear implants
 Or
 About the importance of using sign language with children
that have cochlear implants
 Take a few moments to read the abstract for this week’s
article, being passed around
CI Corner
 This week’s article: The role of sign language for Deaf
children with cochlear implants: Good practice in sign
bilingual settings
 Swanwick & Tsverik, 2007, Deafness and Education
International
 Who did they look at?
 2 mainstream schools and 4 bilingual Deaf schools in
England
 All schools used BSL, to varying degrees
CI Corner
 What did they find?
 “In our discussion with staff from all six sign bilingual
settings it was emphasized to us that few of their pupils
with implants could be described as straightforward or
successful users. There was a sense of frustration that
successful implant users were either never placed or
indeed moved from sign bilingual settings thus feeding a
notion that pupils with implants do not do well in these
environments.” (p. 226)
CI Corner
 More generally…
 Students with CIs benefited from a flexible language
environment that used both BSL and spoken English
 Deaf adults had a positive impact on Deaf children in the
classroom in terms of identity development and self-esteem
 Discussion: What do you think about this study? Do you
believe these findings are important for
parents/caretakers to know when considering a CI for their
child? How can teachers and other advocates make sure
this sort of information is available?
Break!
Agenda
 Discussion: Bonny!
 Theory: More thoughts on language and placement
options
 CI Corner
 Break
 Practice: Application of court cases and findings
 Housekeeping/Wrap up
Importance of Law and Special
Education
 At all starts with PL-94-142, the precursor to IDEA
 Prior to this, educational opportunities for all students
with disabilities were limited, if they existed at all
 Regardless of unintended consequences, these laws
forced state and local education agencies to consider all
children’s needs in terms of education
Deaf Education and the Law
 Unintended consequences of special education law and
Deaf education?
 Mainstreaming is the best option?
 Barely getting by in the mainstream (Cs and Ds) often
considered successful mainstreaming – as some of you said
on the discussion board, isn’t it our job to provide the BEST
education, rather than any education?
Activity
 You will receive 2 handouts – one with questions designed
to help determine the LRE, and the other a court case
about a Deaf child denied an ASL interpreter in a
mainstream classroom. Read and discuss in small groups:
 Do you think the questions to determine LRE would be
helpful in determining placement for a Deaf child?
 What do you think was the flaw in the court’s INITIAL
finding? (Not the final ruling)
 Would consideration of those questions changed this child’s
placement or the services provided to her?
Discussion of application of LRE
 Why is it difficult to meet deaf children’s needs in a
regular classroom?
 What is specialized teaching in the context of deaf
children’s educational needs?
 Why are interpreters perceived by others as “adequate
accommodation”
Agenda
 Discussion: Bonny!
 Theory: More thoughts on language and placement
options
 CI Corner
 Break
 Practice: Application of court cases and findings
 Housekeeping/Wrap up
Housekeeping
 The first essay prompt is currently up on the course
website
 Remember, you have until next Wednesday, class time, to
complete the essay and submit it to me
 (Via e-mail: jes077@mail.harvard.edu) or a paper copy
during class – your preference!
 Any questions on this?
Housekeeping
 Wednesday, April 18
 Apparently, this is a Monday schedule day!
 Thanks, TT!
 We will not have class, BUT the discussion board will still
be open for response to the readings
Housekeeping
 I am happy to announce that next Wednesday from 3:455:00 we will have a guest speaker!
 A local (ASL-fluent) itinerant teacher of the Deaf will be
here to talk about her job and experiences regarding
language and education in her position
Wrap-Up
 Who can share what ideas/experiences they will take away
from this session?
Have an excellent week!