EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS

Prior to 1975, educational opportunities were somewhat limited for children with special needs.
During this time the majority of students who were deaf were sent to residential facilities, and these schools
became a mecca for Deaf culture; in schools for the deaf, students received their education from Deaf
teachers, had exposure to Deaf adults performing a variety of job functions, and were privy to the stories
and traditions previously established by the Deaf community. In many of these settings ASL flourished,
providing students with equal opportunities to engage in classroom discussions and activities.

In 1950, almost 85% of all deaf children attended schools for the deaf (Padden &Humphries, 2005).
Many remained at the schools for extended periods, only returning to their families to celebrate holidays
and family traditions. These institutions provided a cornerstone for their identities while setting the stage
for the formation of friendships that would last a lifetime. (Additional information regarding educational
settings is presented in Chapter 8.) Although prior to the mid-1970s the majority of these students received
their education in residential schools, some parents enrolled their children in public schools, and some
elected to keep their children at home. Moreover, even though public schools admitted the students,
administrators and teachers were not required to provide any special services for them. As a result, many
experienced failure and withdrew from the educational system.

However, the educational arena was transformed in 1975 with the passage of Public Law 94-142
(The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975). With the enactment of this law, public schools
were mandated to provide a free and appropriate education for all students with disabilities. Consequently,
a significant change occurred in the demographic pattern of the school-age deaf population. Touted as a
blessing by some and a curse by others, it signaled a decrease in enrollments at the schools for the deaf
across the country. No longer would the majority of students who were deaf have daily contact with Deaf
teachers and other Deaf professionals traditionally employed in the educational setting fostered by the
schools for the deaf. According to Stinson and Antia (1999), from 1973 to 1984 private and residential
schools experienced a 65% drop in enrollment. In contrast to the remaining 32% who attended residential
schools in 1985, 1.9% of the population was reported as being fully mainstreamed and 6.2% of the students
were partially mainstreamed. This trend continued through the 1990s and has remained constant today. By
the mid-1990s, 91% of students who were deaf were being educated to some extent in their local schools.
In addition, nationally, between 1970 and 2000 the number of students who were deaf attending schools or
special centers for the deaf declined more than 60% as increased numbers of students began and continued
attending neighborhood school programs (Moores, 2006). Currently, approximately three quarters of
children who are deaf or who have severe hearing loss attend local public schools (Antia, Reed, &
Kreimeyer, 2005).

According to the Regional and National Summary provided by the Gallaudet Research Institute (2008),
students who are deaf and hard of hearing are receiving their education in the following settings: 24% in
deaf-centric or center schools, 39.1% in regular school settings with hearing students, 17.4% in self-
contained classrooms in regular education settings, 9.6% in resource rooms, 2.1% at home, and 3.1% in
“Other” settings (Gallaudet Research Institute, 2008).

Today, students who are deaf and hard of hearing attending residential and day schools for the deaf
continue to receive the majority of their instruction, if not all of it, from teachers of the deaf in classes
designed specifically for them. Within both of these settings, students have the opportunity to participate
in extracurricular activities, sports, and other events with other students who are deaf and hard of hearing.
However, unlike in residential schools, in day schools students do not have the option of living in
dormitories and must return to their primary caregivers at the end of the school day. Within both of these
settings and depending on the geographic location, students are sometimes afforded the opportunity to travel
to their neighborhood schools for specific, designated classes. However, depending on the setting, their
time in these schools can be limited.

Even though the majority of those who are deaf attend public schools, the communication mode,
support services, and settings for delivering instruction there are as diverse as the students enrolled in the
programs. Some of the students are included in the general education classroom for the entire day and
receive support services in the form of interpreters, note takers, and tutors. They are also provided services
by itinerant teachers specifically trained to work with them. Although some of these teachers provide
consultative services to general education teachers, others form collaborative partnerships with them and
are provided with the opportunity to co-teach the academic curriculum. Although some students attending
included programs remain in the general education classroom for
the entire day, others are pulled out and receive part of their instruction in resource rooms for one or
more subjects throughout the day. This segment of the student population represents the same degree
of diversity that is reflected in the larger hearing population. Who are the teachers serving these students?
How many of them are deaf? Do these professionals depict the same ethnic diversity as their students?
What are the characteristics of the teachers instructing these students?

Simms, Rusher, Andrews, and Coryell (2008) conducted a diversity survey in 2004 of 3,227
professionals in 313 deaf education programs to determine the characteristics of professionals working in
the field. Their objective was to discover how many D/deaf teachers and D/deaf administrators worked with
students who were deaf in included programs housed in K–12 public or residential schools or were enrolled
in university teacher preparation programs. Of the 33% of those surveyed who responded, results indicated
that 22.0% of the teachers and 14.5% of the administrators were deaf. This is reflective of less than a 10%
increase in deaf professionals since 1993. In addition, 9.5% of teachers and 6.1% of administrators were
professionals of color. Of these minority teachers, only 2.5% were deaf persons of color. Of those who
responded, only 3, or 0.6%, of the deaf administrators were persons of color.

Results further reflect a teaching profession primarily consisting of White, hearing females,
characteristic of the general teaching population today (Simms et al., 2008). These data further support
previous studies that reflect the need for the field of deaf education to “diversify its professional force in
order to utilize the intellectual, linguistic, and multicultural proficiencies of hearing teachers of color, deaf
teachers, and deaf teachers of color” (Simms et al., p. 384). Within these classrooms several forms of
communication are used for instructional purposes. What has historically been used in schools for the deaf?
What are teachers relying on today to instruct their students? Have any significant changes occurred
throughout the past 30 years?