Teaching Profession, Philosophies of

There are different opinions regarding appropriate philosophies when educating deaf children. Regardless, the outcomes for deaf children have not significantly improved over the decades; however, the literature has conveyed that early access to comprehensible communication, whether oral communication or total communication, has warranted positive outcomes for this population. The term Deaf is used to refer to the broad spectrum of deaf children in today’s schools who may or may not self-identify with the Deaf culture.

A federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), places the responsibility on parents to choose the philosophy, yet lack of experience often leaves them feeling vulnerable and inexperienced to make decisions that will create lasting impact. Many students who are deaf are educated in their local school systems, and many children are placed into already existing programs with little regard for philosophies that are best matched to the students’ needs.

The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) and the Council on Education of the Deaf (CED) jointly published in 1996 a set of standards for all beginning teachers of children in today’s schools who have mild to profound hearing losses and who may or may not self-identify with the Deaf culture. Many schools identify themselves as aligning with one philosophy or another (American Annals of the Deaf, 1998) in contrast to the requirements of IDEA that educators first identify the needs of the child, and then determine placement.

There are several philosophies and approaches for teaching students who are deaf; however, the vast majority of deaf students are educated through either oral communication or total communication. The Center for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (CDHH) was created in 1979 to provide support and technical assistance to teachers of students who are deaf and to assist in fostering employment and enhancing the lives of the population. The most important factor to consider is the student’s mode of communication. Modes of communication will vary from student to student. Consideration should be given to the student’s age, degree of auditory difference, time of hearing detection, and its cause. Communication modes will vary along a continuum from American Sign Language (ASL) to the utilization of the student’s own voice. The student may also have skill in lipreading and working with an interpreter. Students who depend on auditory access need to have appropriate assistive listening devices.

Oral communication is an approach that has various forms, such as visual-oral instruction and auditory-verbal therapy. Oral communication requires children to use only spoken language for face-to-face communication. One of the most difficult acquisitions deaf children face is language acquisition.

Visual communication approaches use a visual symbol system to represent the English language structure. This approach focuses on English development by representing grammar through visual codes (VCs). This may include a visual symbol system, signed or written, to represent the structure of English. Many visual communication programs incorporate the use of signs, commonly referred to as Total Communication.

[Page 945]The Total Communication philosophy incorporates all means of communication, including speech, speechreading, auditory training, sign language, and writing. All modes of communication are incorporated in the education of Deaf children through the total communication approach. Total Communication incorporates the use of signs, such as ASL, and visual communication programs. Total Communication is learned along a continuum from sign-supported speech to speech-supported sign. A concern with the total communication approach is that there is much inconsistency in the signing behavior of teachers.

...