This commentary is by John Pirone of South Burlington, a deaf community advocate and a professor at the University of Vermont.
“I want to communicate in American Sign Language [ASL].”
“I want to learn more about myself as a deaf person.”
“Why do I not get to see any deaf peers?”
“Why can’t I learn ASL, even though there are ASL classes being offered at my school?”
These questions or comments are what signing DHHDB children — deaf, hard of hearing, and DeafBlind children — have repeatedly raised during their individualized education plan meetings.
School districts and the Vermont Agency of Education have rarely adequately addressed these students’ questions. When a particular school district or the agency does address them, they fall short. They might give their consideration and then later retract it, citing insufficient resources or lack of qualified professionals to fill particular roles. Educational equity falls by the wayside.
Parents of DHHDB childre have been advocating passionately for their children from day one and repeatedly try to convince school districts and the Agency of Education to provide what their children need and deserve for equitable education.
But school districts and the agency take little to no action to uphold educational equity.
Deaf community advocates who are also experts in deaf education have shared their expertise and lived experiences, and they advocate tirelessly for DHHDB children at educational team meetings.
Outcome: Again, little to no action is taken.
It is my hope that this piece will help engage the public in our advocacy efforts to push school districts and the Agency of Education to address the serious inequities affecting signing DHHDB children.
I want to offer you an overview of what it means for signing DHHDB children when their needs are not met.
If our signing DHHDB children do not gain access to sign language instruction or materials (such as ASL/deaf literature, deaf arts, and deaf history) or have no access to other peers and adults who share a similar background or know ASL, then they suffer almost immeasurably.
Not receiving access to language, deaf culture, and peers with similar backgrounds will put signing DHHDB children at risk for cognitive delays, mental health issues, irreparable trauma, and other problems. Numerous studies confirm this.
The scary part is that over at least the past six years, school districts and the Agency of Education have been aware of these inequities but have done little to address them, thus perpetuating the problem.
The confusing and unfathomable aspect is the AOE has beautifully crafted language on its website espousing a commitment to educational equity in Vermont:
Educational equity means that every student has “access to the educational resources and rigor they need at the right moment in their education across race, gender, ethnicity, language, disability, sexual orientation, family background and/or family income.” Educational equity is the degree of achievement, fairness and opportunity in education as measured by a standard of success. The Agency of Education, along with educators across Vermont, is determined to eliminate the inequity that persists between Vermont’s affluent white students, and student groups that have historically demonstrated achievement gaps within our state’s school systems, including students who are on Individual Education Plans, English learners (ELs), students eligible for free and reduced cost lunch, migrant children, children experiencing homelessness, children in the foster care system, and students of color. Ensuring more equitable schools is an important area of focus within Vermont’s 2019 State Plan.
If the AOE is unequivocal about its commitment to equity, then why has it not addressed the inequities that have been brought to its attention for years?
In addition to educational equity, the AOE also includes language regarding special education:
“Our team, together with all stakeholders, ensures access, opportunity and equity by providing solution-based oversight, leadership and support to build capacity and improve student outcomes.”
If signing DHHDB children, their parents, and community stakeholders have repeatedly requested access to sign language and deaf culture for these students, then how come the AOE has been unable to work with them to ensure access, opportunity, and equity?
As a signing deaf person and an expert in ASL and deaf culture, I would describe the AOE’s lackluster response as institutional audism.
Harlan Lane (1992) defines institutional audism as “The corporate institution for dealing with deaf people, dealing with them by making statements about them, authorizing views of them, describing them, teaching about them, governing where they go to school ….”
If the AOE’s lackluster response is not institutional audism, what is the reason for its insufficient actions within the wider educational system in Vermont? If school districts and the AOE want to address inequities as they say they do, why can’t (or won’t) they reach out to community stakeholders who serve as the best resources?
They may argue that they have sought advice from the state’s Deaf, Hard of Hearing, and DeafBlind Advisory Council, community stakeholders who attend an IEP meeting, or even state employees who are either deaf or work with deaf students.
The tricky part is that just because one is deaf or one works with deaf children does not necessarily mean one is an expert or has a lived experience of being in a K-12 education setting where there is no or limited access to sign language and deaf culture. It is true that the Deaf, Hard of Hearing, and Deaf/Blind Advisory Council has several signing deaf members, but its advice is either not taken seriously or rarely sought.
So what should we do? Are we stuck, or can we move out of stagnation?
The clock is ticking as our signing DHHDB children are left to trudge through their primary and secondary school years with limited, minimal, or no access to what they need the most.
By using the power of the people and of the public, let’s make meaningful outcomes a reality.
