“In Tulsa, Oklahoma and Salem, Oregon, New York City, and
Sioux Falls, South Dakota and in cities and towns throughout
this nation, a deaf or hard of hearing child sits in a classroom,
full of promise, energy, and intelligence. This child like all
other children in this nation, hungers to learn, has dreams to
pursue, and has the native ability and determination to
become a productive adult and partake in our American
democracy. This student may be profoundly deaf and uses
American Sign Language (ASL) as her native language or he
may be hard of hearing and relies exclusively on aural/oral
language.” National Agenda, 2004
Bilingual-Bicultural=Success for
Deaf Children ?
Ryan Commerson, BA
Mott Community College
Yasmina Bouraoui, MPH and Kylie Sharp
Michigan Department of Community Health
Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Program
Faculty Disclosure Information


In the past 12 months, I have not had a significant
financial interest or other relationship with the
manufacturer(s) of the product(s) or provider(s) of
the service(s) that will be discussed in my
presentation.
This presentation will (not) include discussion of
pharmaceuticals or devices that have not been
approved by the FDA or if you will be discussing
unapproved or "off-label" uses of pharmaceuticals
or devices.
Current Deaf Education:
A Dismal Failure

1965: Congressional Babbidge Report
declares Oral Education a failure.

1988: The Commission on Education of the
Deaf – “the results of deaf education have
failed to live up to our expectations and
investments.”
Why?
Basically, in layman terms, Deaf children
have been traditionally viewed as to have a
hearing disability as opposed to being
“bilingual.”
 When seen through a pair of disability
lenses, American Sign Language is often
viewed as an inhibitor to speech
development. (ie: SimCom)

Misconceptions Debunked

Contrary to age old belief, American Sign
Language is a language. In 1955, Dr.
William Stokoe conducted research and
proved “scientifically and unequivocally
that [ASL] meets the full criteria of
linguistics phonology, morphology, syntax,
semantics and use of language to be
classified a fully developed language.”
Misconceptions con’t




Modes and Languages are two different things.
Simultaneous Communication (SimCom) is not a
language.
Total Communication (TC) is an educational
philosophy which became, in practice, “SimCom.”
English is not a mode of communication, it is a
language. Therefore, ASL is not a mode of
communication, it is a language.
Modes of Communication







Speaking
Writing
Signing
Gesticulating
Drawing
Signing Exact English
Cued Speech
vs. Languages






English
Spanish
French
American Sign Language
(ASL)
British Sign Language (BSL)
Lengua de Señas de Costa Rica
(LESCO)
Simultaneous Communication:
What does it look like?
Example #1: TELL
SAY
HORSE RABBIT
NO
Tell… tell the Easter Bunny
… He said, “No, he’s
Example #2: [-------unintelligible-------] YELLOW FLOWER
[----] OTHER 1
Those are purple flowers. I said yellow flowers. Get another one.
English made visible on hands (Signed English) is not accessible linguistically. (S.E.E. is
not a language). The child (4th grader) will need to be competent in English in order to
understand “English on Hands” utterances. Spoken English is not readily accessible due
to child’s varying degrees of deafness. Even with Cochlear Implants, the child does not
hear 100%.
Examination by Dr. Robert Johnson and
Dr. Carol Erting, “Unlocking the Curriculum:
Principles for Achieving Access in Deaf
Education” (1989)
Deaf Students Reading and
Writing Scores:

Average 18-19 year old deaf student is reading at
the level of an average 8-9 year old hearing
student (Traxler, 2000)

Deaf students increase their reading level about
0.3 grade levels per year compared to 1.0 grade
level for many public school hearing students
(Paul, 2003, citing Allen, 1986)
Background:

1960’s - researchers recommend
bilingual/bicultural approaches utilizing deaf
student’s preferred/dominant language – American
Sign language (ASL) and English

1990’s – Deaf Educational professionals meet to
discuss ways to achieve bilingualism

2000 – Jim Cummins ‘Linguistic Interdependency
model’ developed – suggests that when a student’s
first language (both spoken and written) is well
developed, a second language may be easily
acquired and learned
Background:

Deaf students
 Typically have significant gaps in early
language acquisition and development
 By age 5, are often just beginning the language
acquisition and development process
 Deaf students of Deaf parents-develop their
bilingualism simultaneously; ASL often
becomes preferred or dominant language
 Deaf Students of Hearing parents-develop their
bilingualism sequentially
Background:

Deaf students have one pathway (visual) to utilize
in acquiring language(s)

Hearing students have two pathways (aural/oral
and visual) to acquire and learn language(s)

Hearing monolingual students
 Use one language in both school and home
environments
 Learn first language through auditory/oral
pathways supported by visual pathways
 At age 5 begin to develop reading and
writing skills
Background:

Hearing students
pick up conversational (oral) English
spontaneously – at home, school, playground,
sports events, television, radio
 Hearing students use conversational (oral)
English as scaffold to learn more complicated
academic language used in school


Deaf students
use conversational (written) English through email, TTY calls, or note writing
 Social or conversational English involves
reading and writing, more similar to academic
language than social language
 Must make exceedingly concerted effort to
acquire English through reading and writing

Issue:

Deaf students have one pathway (visual) to utilize
in acquiring language (s)

The educational system demands Deaf students
adopt English without an internalized linguistic
resource, ie: strong first language base

Deaf student has many more challenges than the
hearing bilingual student in the process of
attaining English as a second language
Deaf children of hearing families:

Often exposed to visual language such as ASL
only after other methods have failed

Current practices include trial and error
approaches over 3-5 years

Result is delay in ASL and English language
acquisition
Deaf children of deaf families:

Have accessible primary language provided at
home (ASL)

Often have rich language and communication at
home

Communication meaningful and accessible

Feeling of normalcy being deaf
Therefore…
ASL/English Bilingual Education
On Bilingualism

“Bilinguals are those people who use two or more
languages (or dialects) in their everyday lives. This
includes people who have spoken skills in one language
and written skills in the other (a situation that is akin to the
Deaf who sign one language and read/write the other),
people who speak two languages to varying degrees of
proficiency, all the way to people who have complete skills
in their two (or more) languages.” François Grosjean
(1992)
On Biculturalism




Biculturals are characterized by at least three
traits:
(a) they live in two or more cultures,
(b) they adapt, at least in part, to these cultures
(their attitudes, behaviors, values, etc.), and
(c) they blend aspects of these cultures.
François Grosjean (1992)
Star Schools Project

1997 – New Mexico School for the Deaf (NMSD)
proposes ASL/English bilingual framework for
teaching two languages
 Developed an ASL/English Bilingual staff
development model
 Provided teachers with opportunity to study
bilingual theories, first & second language
acquisition, literacy development, action
research projects
Star Schools Project



Established Center for American Sign Language/English
Bilingual Education and Research (CAEBER) at NMSD
Research-based center promoting:
 Effective ASL/Bi-lingual classroom instructional
policies
 Current research to teachers
 Research-based and consistent with emerging
philosophy
 Provide accurate information to parents
 Share teaching model with other schools for the deaf
Involves 11 residential schools for the deaf
Theoretical Foundations

Engaged Learning Principles
 Children are engaged in authentic and multidisciplinary
tasks
 Assessments are based on student’s performance on real
tasks
 Students participate in interactive modes of instruction
 Students work collaboratively
 Students are grouped heterogeneously
 The teacher is a facilitator in learning
 Students learn through exploration
Theoretical Foundations (cont’d)

ASL/English Bilingual Staff Development Model
 Two-year (four semesters) program for teachers
of deaf students (K-12)
 Reading assignments, reflective writing
assignments, discussions on bilingualism, first
and second language acquisition, literacy
theories and practices, bilingual assessment
Theoretical Foundations (cont’d)

Bilingual Approach (ASL dominance and codeswitching)
 ASL Signacy Abilities
 Watching or attending (receptive)
 Signing (expressive)
 English Literacy/oracy abilities
 Fingerreading
 Fingerspelling
 Reading (English Text)
 Writing (English text)
 Typing (English text)
 Lipreading
 Speaking
 Listening
Theoretical Foundations (cont’d)

Development of ASL/English Bilingual Learning
Community
Allowed for discussion of sensitive sociopolitical
issues re schools, curriculum, language use, and
faculty selection (Wrigley, 1992)
 Schools for the deaf had historically forbidden the
use of sign language (Baynton, 1996; Nover,2000)
 Curriculum had often reflected the value of
assimilating the deaf child into the hearing world
without attention to deaf culture (Keefe, 1982)

Theoretical Foundations (cont’d)

Development of ASL/English Bilingual Learning
Community
 Instructional techniques developed for
hearing students were used for instructing
deaf children without consideration for their
visual learning needs (Nover, 2002)
 English-only instructional paradigm hindered
progress in finding creative solutions to
English underachievement of deaf students
(Nover, 2002)
Theoretical Foundations (cont’d)

Cultural process of Deaf Child’s acquisition and learning of ASL and
English addressed


Language learning for children is part of their enculturation
process (Saville-Troike, 1985):
 Language is part of culture and is transmitted from one
generation to the next
 Language is the primary medium through which other
aspects of culture are transmitted
 Language is a tool that children use to explore their social
environment and establish their status and role
relationship within it.
Deaf Culture integrated into all aspects of language and
literacy instruction, including as part of school curriculum
Findings


The deaf students who had teachers participating in the
ASL/English bilingual staff development project
significantly improved their scores on the Stanford-9
subtests of English vocabulary and English language
over three years
The younger group of the ASL/English bilingual
students (ages 8-12years) scored significantly higher
than the national norms for deaf students on the each of
the three Stanford-9 English achievement subtests (i.e.,
English vocabulary, reading comprehension, and
English language).
Findings

Parental hearing status did not significantly affect
performance on the Stanford-9 English achievement
subtests for the younger group (ages 8-12years) of
ASL/English bilingual students. Parental hearing status
did significantly affect the performance for the older
group (ages 13-18 years) of ASL/English bilingual
students. The older students with deaf parents produced
significantly higher scores on all three Stanford-9
English achievement subtests than did the older
students with hearing parents.
Findings

The younger group of the ASL/English bilingual
students entered a residential school at a
significantly younger age than the older group
of the ASL/English bilingual students. The
younger group entered a residential school at an
average age of 6.2 years (ranging from 1 to 11
years of age), while the older group entered a
residential school at an average age of 9.6 years
(ranging from 5 to 17 years of age).
Findings

Profiles of ASL/English bilingual students who
were “high achievers” and “high gainers,” in
terms of their Stanford-9 scores, revealed an
association with these characteristics: high IQ,
deaf parents, use of sign at home, hereditary
deafness, severe or profound hearing loss, and
more years with a teacher involved in the
ASL/English bilingual staff development
project.
Findings

The greater overall length of time that teachers
were involved in the project, the more advanced
were their levels of use of the ASL/English
bilingual training, as revealed by a quasiexperimental design with teacher interviews and
the rating scale, “Levels of Use of the
Innovation” (Hall, Loucks, Rutherford, &
Newlove, 1975). Mentors who were in the
project the greatest number of years showed the
most advanced levels of their use of the
innovation (the ASL/English bilingual staff
development project).
Findings from the Indiana School
for the Deaf
Implemented Bilingual-Bicultural philosophy in
1989; students were graduating at a 3rd-4th
grade level
 By 2003 the average reading level for
graduating seniors at ISD had jumped to 8.6
grade
 Average reading level for ALL Indiana
graduating seniors was 8.25 grade level
 By 2003 59% of ISD students received a
diploma and of those students 100% of them
went to college

Findings from the Indiana School
for the Deaf
Improved English skills
 Increased hearing aid use
 Increased number of students with cochlear
implants
 Increased demand for auditory services

“At the heart of both the wonderful capabilities of these
children and the systemic failure to serve them is a
fundamental issue of human rights, one that illuminates the
truly unique nature of deaf and hard of hearing children: the
need and right to develop and be exposed to communication
and language. Without communication there can be no
educational growth and no personal, emotional, and social
development. The need and right to communicate must
become the foundation of any educational system for deaf
and hard of hearing children for it is so “tightly woven into
human experience that it is scarcely possible to imagine life”
without it.” National Agenda, 2004
Contacts

Ryan Commerson, BA
chimprock@aol.com

Yasmina M. Bouraoui, MPH and Kylie Sharp
Michigan Department of Community Health
Early Hearing Detection and Intervention
bouraouiy@mi.gov
sharpk@mi.gov
Bibliography
Allen, T., Patterns of Academic Achievement Among Hearing Impaired
Students; Deaf Children in America, San Diego, CA: Little Brown,
1986
Baynton, D.C. Forbidden Signs: American Culture and the Campaign
Against Sign Language, Chicago: The University Press, 1996
Grosjean, François “The Bilingual and the Bicultural Person in the
Hearing and in the Deaf World”, Sign Language Studies, Volume 77,
Winter 1992
Indiana School for the Deaf: No Deaf or Hard of Hearing Child Left
Behind: They Can Have It All, ASHA Convention, Power Point
Presentation, November 2003
Johnson, Robert K., et al: Unlocking the Curriculum: principles for
Achieving Access in Deaf Education, 1989
Keefe, J.F., Cultural Reproduction and the Hidden Curriculum: An
Investigation into Preschool Programs for the Deaf. (Doctoral
Dissertation, Boston University) 1982
Bibliography
The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equity
for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students, June 2004
Nover, Stephen M. Star School USDLC Engaged Learning Project No.5
ASL/English bilingual staff development project in Deaf Education;
Evaluation and Impact Study; Final Report 1997-2002
Saville-Troike, M. Input in Second Language Acquisition: Series on
Issues in Second Language Research, Cambridge, MA: Newbury
House Publishers, 1985
Traxler, C. The Stanford Achievement Test, 9th Edition: National Norming
and Performance Standards for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students,
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 2000
Wrigley, O.P. Sound Knowledge: The Political Meaning of Deafness,
(Doctoral Dissertation, University of Hawaii) 1992